[leps-talk] Heliconius charithonius in Dallas, Texas...sort of...

[Michael Gochfeld]

When I first heard that the Massachusetts Queens was the western subspecies, I
thought that this INCREASED the likelihood of a wild, natural origin. Others
have the opposite view (Alex, Harry?).  Don't we northeasterners get a lot of
emigrants from the southwest (Painted Lady, comes to mind first).  It points out
the usefulness (or at least the interest) of subspecific identification.  But,
that still leaves us a controversy to sort out.

And no, I don't seem to have saved (or perhaps even seen) a photo of the New
Jersey Queen.

Mike Gochfeld

Harry Pavulaan wrote:

> Dale Clark wrote:
>
> <<
> I'm probably opening a can of worms here, and I don't really mean to, but
> it's just frustrating for someone like myself (and many others) who are
> trying to monitor populations, etc. and find these...illegals...flying
> about.  Just felt like venting a bit.
> >>
>
> Dale:  Please do vent!  And...open that can of worms.  While I absolutely
> hate the thought of more government rules and regulations, the butterfly
> release industry really should take a look at it's practices and consider
> adhering to some ethical standards and "policing" itself, or the government
> will do it.
>
> I have absolutely nothing against the release of butterflies obtained
> locally or within the same regional biogeographic province where the same
> gene pool exists, but the introduction of specimens of a distinct subspecies
> into the range of another is disturbing.  While a few isolated releases are
> probably not a problem (I suppose the genes will be absorbed into the local
> population without effect, if cross-breeding occurs), if this practice
> accelerates, well, I can see where problems might arise.
>
> The increasing numbers of Danaus gilippus that have been reported in the
> northeast in recent years, with a surge of reports this year, initially
> seemed to indicate a previously undocumented migratory phenomenon.  Or does
> it?  A recent report from Marblehead, MA. (just northeast of Boston) was
> documented with photographs.  Turns out that this individual is distinctly
> subspecies "strigosus" (based on distinct characteristic dorsal HW marks)
> and not nominotypical "gilippus", meaning that its origin is in the American
> southwest rather than Florida.  Does this mean it's a migrant that came up
> through the midwest, then came eastward and found its way into New England?
> Strigosus is somewhat migratory, so it sounds plausible but unlikely.  Or
> does this indicate that strigosus is being released in the east?  Now, all
> of these northeastern D. gilippus sightings are thrown into doubt.
>
> My recommendation is for breeders to tag or mark all of their stock destined
> for release so that at least the first generation "releasees" can be
> identified.
>
> Harry Pavulaan
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
> http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
>
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
> Home Selling? Try Us!
> http://us.click.yahoo.com/QrPZMC/iTmEAA/MVfIAA/CCYolB/TM
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------~->
>
> TILS Motto: "We can not protect that which we do not know" © 1999
>
> Subscribe:  TILS-leps-talk-subscribe at yahoogroups.com
> Post message: TILS-leps-talk at yahoogroups.com
> Archives: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TILS-leps-talk/messages
> Unsubscribe:  TILS-leps-talk-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
> For more information: http://www.tils-ttr.org
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


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

   For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:

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