[Leps-l] Potential loss of monarch overwintering habitat in Mexico

[MexicoDoug]

Minor peave:

When using the common name, Oyamel, for the conifer Abies religiosa 
adding "Fir" and turning it into  the "Oyamel Fir" sounds wierd to me.  
The correct English name in botanical use apparently is the "Sacred 
Fir".

In Mexico, it is simply the Oyamel (pl. Oyameles) unless tourism in 
English due to the Monarchs is influencing this beautiful word.  
"Oyamel Fir" sounds sort of like calling the Lost Monarch a "Coast 
Redwood Sequoia" instead of a Coast Redwood.  (The Lost Monarch is the 
name of the most massive Redwood and sixth most massive tree in the 
world ;-). )

Looks like some of the early Monarch researchers invented the name 
"Oyamel Fir", and that botanists call them their correct Native 
American common name of Oyamel or 'Sacred Fir;,   If there is some 
overriding reason other than language difficulties of a few guys that 
went down there a few decades ago, or I've got this wrong, please let 
me know since I think it would be nice to preserve its indigenous name 
which already includes the concept of being a conifer...

Best Doug

-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Cherubini <monarch at saber.net>
To: Leps List <leps-l at mailman.yale.edu>
Sent: Sun, Feb 17, 2013 3:09 am
Subject: Re: [Leps-l] Potential loss of monarch overwintering 
habitat	in	Mexico

> On 2/16/2013 8:16 PM, Foley, Patrick wrote:

>> Count me (and the great majority of atmospheric scientists)
>> among the climate change alarmists.
>>
>> Skepticism in science is a very useful tool. But one should
>> be skeptical of ones own views also.  As far as I can see,
>> most climate change deniers do not question their own
>> belief systems or what motivates them.

Stan Gorodenski wrote:

> Good point. This never occurred to me. I wonder if climate
> change deniers even know themselves what motivates them.

How is any of the above "denier" and "motivation" discussion
relevant to the subject of this thread; i.e. relevant to the
question of whether or not any credible science exists
to support the contention that temperatures in the overwintering
region of Mexico could conceivably increase by a staggering
and unprecedented 3-4 degrees during the next 18 years
and (Chip Taylor's words} "eliminate most of the suitable
areas for overwintering because it would eliminate the
oyamel fir trees."?

Especially given the fact that we know that during the
past 35 years of global warming the altitudes that
monarchs overwinter at in Mexico did not change
and no deaths of oyamel fir trees were observed?

And the fact that we also know that the latitudes
at which monarchs overwintering along the California
coast did not shift northward during the past
75 years of warming?

Paul Cherubini
El Dorado, Calif.
_______________________________________________
Leps-l mailing list
Leps-l at mailman.yale.edu
http://mailman.yale.edu/mailman/listinfo/leps-l