[Leps-l] unsubscribe

magritash at aol.com magritash at aol.com
Sun Feb 17 19:42:21 EST 2013



unsubscribe

-----Original Message-----
From: BPatter789 <BPatter789 at aol.com>
To: mexicodoug <mexicodoug at aol.com>; papaipema <papaipema at aol.com>; dws1108 <dws1108 at msn.com>; leps-l <leps-l at mailman.yale.edu>
Sent: Sun, Feb 17, 2013 7:01 pm
Subject: Re: [Leps-l] [leps-talk] Monarch Armageddon


>>>Since this thread began a week ago, US population has increased by 60,000.  That is 1.2 million more acres (1,800 square miles) of habitat disruption: 500,000 acres in the US and 700,000 acres outsourced. The total area mentioned is double the area of Champaign County, Illinois. <<<
 
It seems to me that this sort of extrapolation is unreasonable.
 
Some "facts" gleaned from Google searches:
 

How many acres of land are in the world 
 
The land are of the earth is about 148,940,000 km² , or about 57,491,000 mi2 or about 36,794,240,000 acres. 
Population and Arable Land 
 
However, there are only 12 million square miles (7.68 billion acres) of arable land. 
 
Population and Arable Land 
 
The U.S. has 3.794 million square miles, of which 3.54 million square miles is land area (for a fast growing U.S. population of 300 million people as of the end of year 2006).
That is only 8.09 acres per person in the U.S.
However, only about a quarter of that is arable land.
That means there are only about 2.02 acres per person of arable land in the U.S.

 
public land acreage in the united states - Google Search 
 
The federal government owns 655 million acres of land in the U.S., 29% of the total 2.3 billion acres.
 
I am not sure whether Military lands or Indian lands are included in the 655 million acres cited above.
 
It is not reasonable to assume that each new person born into or arriving in the United States "requires" the average number of acres attributed per capita at any given time.  We will not be adding to the inventory of government held lands, waste spaces, etc.  Nor will we be doing it anywhere else.  The "footprint" of each new person on the planet or in the United States eats into and decreases the averages.
 
Bob Patterson
12601 Buckingham Drive
Bowie, Maryland 20715
(301) - 262-2459 pm. hours
Moth Photographers Group Website
My Personal Moths Website

 

In a message dated 2/17/2013 4:52:30 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, mexicodoug at aol.com writes:
Thanks   Jim, Thanks Dennis,

I'm saddened to hear this.  I also think a   reasonable interpretation 
could attribute this to the farming practices,   and if everything is 
sitting in the middle of the corn varieties bred to   have herbicide 
tolerance ... it doesn't take a genius to have at least a   little 
confidence as to the causal relationship with the change in farming   
technique.

I don't have the same sensitivity to this issue as   you.  In my case it 
is simply an empty feeling that accompanies the   continued loss of 
biodiversity in some place far away while I have my own   set of 
ecological problems closer to the heart.  So it is with the   due respect 
of not living with it in my backyard that I ask your   indulgence to 
think about my comments.

First, the good; I want to   congratulate you both on dedicating your 
time to insects that in the   public perception are probably 
insignificant, drab little skippers which   get about as much respect as 
moths in musty closet.  I personally   find miniature skippers 
marvelously exquisite and certainly more   intellectually challenging 
than Monarchs sans the migration   phenomenon.  You are presenting first 
hand data which when combined   with other species statistics gives us a 
more concrete measuring stick of   ecological health by not picking some 
"pretty" generalized ecological   indicator.  Far more useful for 
scientific analysis to describe the   rate the ecosystem is declining.

Next, the bad: As scientific, the   hypothesis that it is Bt corn (or 
whatever the hypothesis) needs to be   tested rather than conveniently 
assumed as I did in my first paragraph, I   want to be sure that I am 
properly interpreting the loss in its context.   Are these species at the 
fringe of their ranges and is there any other   explanation we should 
rule out?  The edge of a USDA type zone which   breathes cyclically?  And 
was this land the robust natural habitat   for these skippers before the 
farmers came on to the scene ... or was   their appearance likely 
prompted by prior farming techniques which altered   the ecosystem and 
gave them the cornfield-niche in the first place?    There are more 
considerations I'm sure you've both though about, and it is   a very 
healthy discussion to go through them as the due diligence of   
presenting unbiased statements.

Finally, the ugly: I hope anyone   reading this knows that my question 
was not whether the test-tube bred   corn was detrimental to habitat.  It 
was whether the Bt-Corn pollen,   is killing the larvae as the Cornell 
study said it would and was used   indiscriminately under what would be 
pseudoscientific pretences to create   anarchy in the agricultural 
industry and all of its dependents 12-15 years   ago, and was still 
kicking and screaming 10 years ago.  If it didn't,   I'm relieved but 
need to re-evaluate the reputation of those who jumped on   this 
bandwagon and see whether they fudged their research techniques for   the 
purpose distorting truth and advancing an agenda.  Please don't   think 
I'm supporting the use of these agricultural techniques.  I   need 
Bt-corn in my zone as much as I want to live next to a garbage   dump.  
But a balanced approach is imperative where scientific   credibility is 
not abused by those who prey on the ignorance of the public   perception 
because they feel they have a superior moral calling.    There is no room 
in science for Popes.  In Sagan's words - there are   no "scientific 
authorities", just a method and to that I would add a   scholarly conduct 
which is as old as science itself, when it branched off   from philosophy 
and religion.

Epilogue: In a country where less   than 2% of the population is 
interested in doing commercial farming and   land is being gobbled up at 
IMO truly alarming rates due to unfettered   population growth which is 
transparently demonstrable (I'm an alarmist!   ;-) , it is not surprising 
to me that ecological niches are   decreasing.  I fail to see how a small 
group of elite and affluent   find terrorizing technology a moral calling 
rather than utilizing   systematic approaches to optimizing what we 
have...and going back to the   basics of the 1960's ZPG population growth 
models.  The current   national model of the USA is growth, growth, 
growth - for everything from   collecting taxes, to growing business and 
government, increasing   infrastructure, and just about everything else.  
I would expect to   lose niches along the way since these political 
pressures for growth   require that agriculture becomes more efficient as 
the industry is asked   to grow more food with less acreage and manpower. 
The fact that the   corn-belt is looking more like a factory is one 
visible manifestation of   this.  If the glass is half empty, I'd just 
say, let’s all move to   the Sierra foothills of California and Oregon, 
and then north to   Alaska.  But if it is half full, just involve the 
community and share   the beauty of nature in a positive manner to 
support a culture of   appreciation instead of finger pointing which will 
only turn people off   from scientists and the scientific method in 
general.  Provide   unbiased statistics and have people miss nature 
instead of run away from   the scientific alarmists, infidels and 
priests.  Since this thread   began a week ago, US population has 
increased by 60,000.  That is 1.2   million more acres (1,800 square 
miles) of habitat disruption: 500,000   acres in the US and 700,000 acres 
outsourced. The total area mentioned is   double the area of Champaign 
County, Illinois.  Crap.  Now, to   till my first vegetable garden and 
identify which politicians are ZPG   friendly....

Best
Doug

-----Original Message-----
From:   Jim Wiker <papaipema at aol.com>
To: dws1108 <dws1108 at msn.com>;   leps-l <leps-l at mailman.yale.edu>
Sent: Sat, Feb 16, 2013 10:37   pm
Subject: Re: [Leps-l] [leps-talk] Monarch   Armageddon

Doug,
Same thing A. arogos, H. ottoe, H. metea and   H. leonardus here in 
Illinois. Most where common to abundant (where they   occurred) into the 
mid 1990's. At that point they began a rather rapid   decline and now 
haven't been seen for a number of years. Ottoe in   particular, well into 
the 90's could be found by the hundreds in   several sites, I saw the 
last one in Illinois with Bob Pyle in 2008. It,   nor the others have 
been seen since.
Jim Wiker
Greenview,   IL


-----Original Message-----
From: Dennis Schlicht   &lt;dws1108 at msn.com&gt;
To: MexicoDoug   &lt;mexicodoug at aol.com&gt;
Cc: leps-l   &lt;leps-l at mailman.yale.edu&gt;
Sent: Sat, Feb 16, 2013 9:11   pm
Subject: Re: [Leps-l] [leps-talk] Monarch   Armageddon

Doug,
They were doing Ok through the 80's and most of the   90's but then were 
wiped out by the late 2000's. Poweshiek numbers went   from around 100 on 
one site to none by 2010. These species were on   preserves, not farm 
land, but were surrounded by row crops. Gone or nearly   so are O. 
poweshiek, A. arogos, H. dacotae, H. ottoe and C. inornata. A   few 
others are not far behind.
Dennis Schlicht
Iowa Lepidoptera   Project
  ----- Original Message -----
  From:   MexicoDoug
  To: dws1108 at msn.com
  Cc:   leps-l at mailman.yale.edu
  Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2013   11:54   AM
  Subject: Re: [Leps-l] [leps-talk]   Monarch   Armageddon


Dennis,

It would be helpful   to know whether these   species' disappearances in
your area were   doing well before the Bt corn,   or already on the brink
of loss   due to the farming practices.  Also,   whether this loss   you've
documented is due to the larva of the respective   species   ingesting
amounts toxic to them and dying due to it as was     proposed by the
Cornell group. If it wasn't, I'd argue the   unfortunate   situation was,
at best, not helped by a raging   controversy which IMO   served to 
divert
and divide attention   from these issues, and not present   work in
alternate peer   reviewed journals - which could be as simple as     
computer
models to maintain a greater degree of   biodiversity.

Could   a more collaborative environment have   come up with real 
solutions
and   perhaps a coordinated crop   rotation scheme which maintained some
useful   wild area   interspersed intelligently (where students at local   
ag
colleges   in a supportive roll could participate in the   design as part
of their   curriculum)?  Perhaps not.    But it's not too late to find 
out
-   I hope.

I'm not   trying to be a Monday morning quarterback; and my post   was   
not
in support of Bt-corn.  I'm glad it's not in my backyard,   and   how
boring it must be to try to go Lepping in such an   area.  It's   seeing
the tactics used by scientists we   trust.  My favorite   butterfly
observing grounds was a   unique mountain foothill habitat on   disturbed
ground which had   become overgrown and basically wild and teaming   with
over 100   species of butterflies, and at any given time at least 1/3
that   amount.  Now, the many hectares, without exception, are parking
lots   and malls and shopping areas in a series of new sprawled out
commercial   centers - and at the boundaries are residential areas with
manicured lawns   and the like.  The development wiped out everything
except the   cockroaches and people and occasional vagrant that ends up
plastered to a   radiator grill.

I am sure we all are sensitive to   the   overpopulation problem.  Every
year the US adds 3,000,000     people.  In 1965 it was 194 million; 
today,
over 315   million.    It is difficult for me to fathom how much   
equivalent
habit is destroyed   for each person for their   activities (imagine
3,000,000 dumped   concentrated into your   state - that is approximately
the average amount by   state since   1965, btw) , "infrastructure
development", and of course the     food they require.  For some reason 
no
one is having any success   in   controlling this and we are stuck with
these   consequences   everywhere.  We could outsource farming,   by
importing more food from   Canada, etc., but then we'd only be   
exporting
the environmental drain with   it to other   places...

Very sorry to hear what you     reported,
Doug




-----Original   Message-----
From:   Dennis Schlicht   &lt;dws1108 at msn.com&gt;
To: leps-l   &lt;leps-l at mailman.yale.edu&gt;;   MexicoDoug   
&lt;mexicodoug at aol.com&gt;
Sent: Sat, Feb   16, 2013   9:48 am
Subject: Re: [Leps-l] [leps-talk] Monarch     Armageddon

Doug,
The article below says Bt corn was 19% of the   crop   then. It's 80-90%
now. While all of this Monarch concern   has been going   on, we have 
lost
5 prairie obligate   butterflies in the tall-grass prairie/   Bt corn
region (my data   in Iowa). Our prairies are surrounded by   corn.
Dennis   Schlicht
  ----- Original Message -----
    From:   MexicoDoug
  To: monarch at saber.net ;   leps-l at mailman.yale.edu
    Sent: Saturday, February 16,   2013 2:35   AM
  Subject: Re:   [Leps-l]   [leps-talk] Monarch   Armageddon


"Doug, it   was   Lincoln Brower who first set the precedent
for     using the word   "Armageddon" in this article and others   like     
it:"

Paul,

Huh ;-0 ??? I   honestly didn't know and   wouldn't   expect he was   the
source.

I wonder what the   majority of   unbiased   scientists think of someone 
of
Lincoln     Brower's repute throwing out words   such as   "Armageddon"   to
describe the evolving sciences in     agro-biotechnology. This   is really
an insult to   science;   'Armageddon' has deeply   religious   connotations
and is from the New   Testament Bible   the   destruction of the Devil an
epic battle when God   comes   down and   unleashes his fury. What   place
do
such religious     overtone-statements have   in science other than to
polarize/bias,   divert   and   offend researchers and   constructive
discussion?

I just   Googled,   and sadly it   seems you are right. I found   this
article
in Mother   Jones   that Brower had   written in 2001, which was a result
of
the   GMO     scandal that developed at that   time:

http://www.orionmagazine.org/index.php/articles/article/85

It       gives me insight, to say the least.

It seems that Brower   for   some   reason couldn't participate in the   
USDA
grant for the   research into the   GMO-larva   topic program and $200,000
grant   (which he considered   a   pittance). Another diverse team   of
experts with   some of the finest   academic credentials in this     country
was selected and a paper resulted   published in the   most   prestigious
peer reviewed journal in the   United   States - The   Proceedings of the
National   Academy of   Sciences:

http://www.pnas.org/content/98/21/11937.abstract?sid=e059121b-ade8-4518-895c-2c10e4c5b113

Brower's       political statement printed in Mother Jones strikes me as    
a
scathing,   rambling condemnation and conspiracy theory   -   political
mobilization   strategy. Is that an   appropriate place   to refute a
publication by     trashing everyone in government and   industry? Or
would
it be   better   to respond in the same peer   review journal   which 
accepts

contrary/disagreement submissions in a     specific format for this 
purpose

called "Letters to the PNAS".   I   couldn't find any retort.    Maybe
you'll have   better     luck:

http://www.pnas.org/cgi/collection/letters

In       the 1960's time frame Lincoln had the honor to be published   in
thwe
PNAS   himself, at least 4 times. He is also   an   excellent speaker.

Is   the "Bt-corn killing   monarch larvae"   in the field still
objectionable by     ecologists anymore, on a   scientific basis? Now I
think
it   finally hit me   why the   monarch topic is avoided by   some     list
members.

Best
Doug

-----Original     Message-----
From:   Paul Cherubini     &lt;monarch at saber.net&gt;
To: Leps List       &lt;leps-l at mailman.yale.edu&gt;
Sent:   Fri, Feb 15,   2013   4:46 pm
Subject: Re: [Leps-l] [leps-talk]   Monarch     Armageddon

On Feb 15, 2013, at 1:00 PM,   MexicoDoug     wrote:

&gt; I added the search   term "Armageddon" for     fun.

Doug, it was Lincoln   Brower who first set the   precedent
for   using the   word "Armageddon" in this article and   others like   it:
http://www.non-gmoreport.com/articles/july2011/GMcropsmonarchbutterflieshabitat.php

In       the article Lincoln said this about Roundup herbicide use
in the   GMO   crops   of the upper Midwest:

“It kills   everything. It’s   biodiversity   Armageddon,"

And   Lincoln and Chip Taylor   collaborated on a paper
and     wrote: "We conclude that, because   of the extensive
use of   glyphosate   herbicide on crops that are     genetically
modified to resist the herbicide,   milkweeds   will   disappear
almost completely from croplands."

But   the     critically important information they don't   mention
in their paper is   that   the field margins of   these Roundup
treated GMO crops are   teaming with     bumblebees, honeybees,
monarchs and butterflies   like   this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jZCOJnJU1UE

So       those GMO croplands are not hardly a legitimate
example of        "Biodiversity Armageddon"

Paul Cherubini
El   Dorado,       Calif.

_______________________________________________
Leps-l       mailing   list
Leps-l at mailman.yale.edu
http://mailman.yale.edu/mailman/listinfo/leps-l



_______________________________________________
Leps-l       mailing   list
Leps-l at mailman.yale.edu
http://mailman.yale.edu/mailman/listinfo/leps-l




    _______________________________________________Leps-l mailing   
listLeps-l at mailman.yale.eduhttp://mailman.yale.edu/mailman/listinfo/leps-
l
_______________________________________________
Leps-l   mailing   list
Leps-l at mailman.yale.edu
http://mailman.yale.edu/mailman/listinfo/leps-l



_______________________________________________
Leps-l   mailing   list
Leps-l at mailman.yale.edu
http://mailman.yale.edu/mailman/listinfo/leps-l


 
_______________________________________________
Leps-l mailing list
Leps-l at mailman.yale.edu
http://mailman.yale.edu/mailman/listinfo/leps-l

 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.yale.edu/pipermail/leps-l/attachments/20130217/f0dc9420/attachment-0001.html 


More information about the Leps-l mailing list