Secrecy or not?

[Jack Harrison]

Scenario:

Imagine I find a small and obviously fragile population of Chequered Skipper in a remote corner of a wood in Rutland.

Choices.
1. Keep quiet so that collectors can’t destroy the colony (are there any collectors still around?)
2. Inform the local wildlife trust on the condition that they keep quiet and manage within the enormous constraints of a limited budget.
3. Let all and sundry know in the anticipation that someone will come up with the best strategy for management and moreover, allow the greatest number of people to enjoy.

I have my views but let’s expand the topic hear what others think.

Jack

[GOLDENORFE]

i would keep quiet about it, but maybe ask consevation to see what they might advise

phil

ps where did you find them lol

[Jack Harrison]

ps where did you find them lol

Sshh. SP840998. I bet you look it up!

Jack

[Paul]

I think I would contact the BC species co-ordinator for the local BC branch and no-one else initially, and only after obtaining landowner permission to do so..

In my experience officials are likely initially to disbelieve you, but probably ask someone else they trust to have a look, ( unless of course you happen to be that person anyway ).... if found to be true I think National BC would possibly put resources in to study the colony. Having said that, I don't think the South Yorks SBBs/ SAs have received much enthusiasm from official quarters, so it would depend on how genuine the population would seem to be. - if felt to be overlooked for decades then there would be National joy and protection, if introduced, then shrugs and apathy.

I think that's what I think

[David M]

I'd PM Pete Eeles!

[Lee Hurrell]

I'd contact local and national BC.

I don't think you could stipulate any conservation body or wildlife trust keep quiet though. They would surely have the best interests of the insects at heart and would do what they feel is best.

BC would most likely keep quiet anyway to allow study and conservation to take place before anyone is allowed to trample all over the site.

Lee

[Gibster]

Were the species in question birds rather than butterflies, the usual course of action would be to contact what is known as The Rare Breeding Birds Panel (RBBP). Below is a summary of their guidelines for observers who have discovered a rare breeding species. In principle it would transfer very happily to the world of butterflies:-

" The Panel has now developed new guidelines to help observers record the most relevant facts about their observations, which can be found on the RBBP website. This leaflet explains the background to the work of the Rare Breeding Birds Panel, and why good-quality data are essential in allowing the collation of the most robust and reliable statistics on these species. Please read this and help RBBP improve the standards of recording of some of our rarest breeding species. Higher-quality records will greatly assist in our understanding of the status and distribution of the rarer breeding birds in the UK, allowing population trends to be monitored and conservation efforts to be better directed.

In particular, please note the following key points:

1. Records of rare breeding birds should be submitted in the first instance to the relevant county bird recorder. This allows the recorder to view all records of a species at a site in a year so that they can collate meaningful end-of-season summaries of the numbers and status of each species. They will then submit a detailed summary to the Panel.
2. Each record should give an indication of the breeding category of the species. The same categories (possible, probable and confirmed breeding) used in Bird Atlas fieldwork are used and the full list of codes and guidance on their use are given in the leaflet. A record of a pair of birds that reach the point of egg-laying is classed as confirmed breeding, regardless of whether they are ultimately successful or not, and these records are the most important of all.
3. Accurate recording of the location of a breeding (or potentially breeding) pair is imperative. This allows RBBP and the county recorder to distinguish different pairs and ensures that the confidential archive maintained by the Panel is accurate. Maintenance of the archive ensures that data on rare breeding birds is never lost and ensures that the protection of these birds is not compromised. Secrecy over the nesting locations of Honey Buzzards in southern England a few years ago meant that an alleged egg theft incident could not be verified, as the nest sites had not been made available to RBBP and no-one else had access to this information. The RBBP is an independent body and all information held is held confidentially, and details are only made available under strict control to bona fide individuals. RBBP has the respect of the ornithological community and there has been no loss or leakage of sensitive data in its 38-year history. "

Guess that sums it up quite nicely?

Gibster (a keen birder).

[Jack Harrison]

Gibster wrote ref rare birds:

...details are only made available under strict control to bona fide individuals...

I appreciate that birding is slightly different in that there are still bird egg collectors. But I would like to think that the butterfly community has grown out of that and very few people today are “stamp collectors” (for stamp, read butterfly). So I would argue that there is minimal reason to withhold information about rare butterflies for fear of predation by humans.

There is a case for arguing that the widespread dissemination about a locality for a rare butterfly might lead to damage of a fragile habitat or to trespassing onto private land.
Equally, it could be said that localities should be public knowledge as this might be the best way to preserve a habitat that if kept secret might much more readily be damaged or lost.

Remember history. Wicken Fen was established as a reserve in 1899 so that insect collectors would have ideal hunting ground. If no one had known how good Wicken was for insects, it would have been lost to continued peat extraction. For Wicken Fen in the 19th century and its army of collectors, read (my hypothetical) wood in Rutland and an army of camera wielding enthusiasts.

Jack

[Gibster]

There is a case for arguing that the widespread dissemination about a locality for a rare butterfly might lead to damage of a fragile habitat or to trespassing onto private land.
Equally, it could be said that localities should be public knowledge as this might be the best way to preserve a habitat that if kept secret might much more readily be damaged or lost.

Last June I visited Cambridgeshire for Black Hairstreak, a species I'd never seen before. Prior to visiting I requested help regards best sites/tactics and Nick B stepped in with very good directions to the favoured area in Brampton Wood. Within twenty minutes of leaving the carpark I was watching my first ever Black Hairstreaks (cheers again Nick!) Without Nick's accurate directions I may have wandered the site willy-nilly, stomping through rare plants, trespassing onto private land, upsetting relationships between naturalists and landowners and wreaking havoc with every step, particularly had I have needed many return visits. Happily I found the 'sacrificial clearings' (which really have been stomped to hell!!!), enjoyed the butterfly at close quarters and quit the site with no extra damage being caused.

Gibster.

[Piers]

There is a case for arguing that the widespread dissemination about a locality for a rare butterfly might lead to damage of a fragile habitat.

This is in all likelihood a greater threat these days than the activities of collectors. One only has to look at the damage done at Stockbridge Down when some joker released a couple of black veined white. The place looked as if a herd of gnu had migrated through it. Had I been a botanist and arrived to study some particular ground flora or other I would have been livid...!

So, I would go option 2 in the first instance, with the fragility and integrity of the habitat in mind.

Either that or I would phone my mate Pete and we would try and organise some sort of cover-up; and just vaguely allude to a colony and then deny everything when you asked us Jack.

Felix.

[Susie]

Hmm, here's what I would do:- Squeel with delight, jump up and down excitedly saying "Ohmygodohmygodohmygod" and then rush off a text to Kipper. After that keep quiet and let him deal with it.

[Lee Hurrell]

Either that or I would phone my mate Pete and we would try and organise some sort of cover-up; and just vaguely allude to a colony and then deny everything when you asked us Jack.

[Jack Harrison]

You think I was joking about Chequered Skippers in Wardley Wood (SP840998) just to the west of Uppingham, Rutland. Well, not so much a joke but designed to put you off the scent.

However, the real location isn't a million miles away as my good friend The Hon.Sir Charles Fortesque-Barrington-Rothschild * (who has kindly let me explore his estate) knows.
Charles and I are on very good terms but he doesn't really like this Hon.Sir Charles bit and prefers to be known as The Right Charlie.

* Debunks' Peerage

Jack

[Gibster]

You think I was joking about Chequered Skippers in Wardley Wood (SP840998) just to the west of Uppingham, Rutland. Well, not so much a joke but designed to put you off the scent.

However, the real location isn't a million miles away

Oh buggerit. Looks as though my fave UK butterfly is about to be down-graded complete with a loss of mystique. I kinda hope the introduction/release fails.
I note Chequered Skippers are protected from sale in Britain. Presumably that only applies to home stock? Or are these the progeny of wild collected but not bought larvae?

Jack, did you start this thread out of genuine interest or was it more the musings of a guilty conscience?

I entirely approve of conservation measures, habitat improvement, protection of endangered species/subspecies. I do not approve of translocations/moving things around for the sake of it. I realise I'm completely ignorant of the facts pertaining to this example and I'm willing to be educated, but so far I don't like it.

Gibster.

[Gibster]

Scenario:

Imagine I find a small and obviously fragile population of Chequered Skipper in a remote corner of a wood in Rutland.

I had presumed you were talking about a relict population (and only hypothetically!) not a released population. With that in mind, please disregard my post concerning the RBBP. Cage birds and pet birds do, obviously, escape from time to time. There are very very few (recent) examples of birdwatchers/keepers/breeders attempting to establish self-supporting populations of exotica in the British countryside. Bodies such as RSPB, EN, WWT may attempt their own re-introductions but only after one heck of a lot of research, money and manpower has been thrown at the project, which also needs to be believed wholly worthwhile. Not individuals. This is one major difference between the birding scene and the butterfly scene.

Sorry, I'm with the birders on this one. Actually I'm not sorry either.

Gibster.

[Jack Harrison]

Gibster asked:

Jack, did you start this thread out of genuine interest or was it more the musings of a guilty conscience?

Not at all because of any guilty conscience - I don't have one.

No, I just felt that the debate should be more focused on one just aspect as there seemed to be several topics in the "Obsession" thread that really needed to be separated.

Jack

[Paul Wetton]

Too many unknowns for me to form an opinion at the moment but I'll be watching this thread with great interest. Thanks for starting it off Jack.

[Rogerdodge]

I know exactly what I would do, but I am not going to tell you.

[dave brown]

Putting my head slightly above the parapet, this situation creates a great dilemma for the finder. We have to acknowledge that the finding of a previously unknown English colony of Chequered Skipper (or well established introduced colony) will generate a massive interest, especially in the first year. Following years will see less national interest and therefore will be a true reflection of the likely impact on the local situation. Its how you manage the breaking of the news and the impact that could have. If its on a private site without access that is the end of the story anyway. If its on a public site then the news will break one day, that is the way of the world.
Assuming that this is a geninue re-introduction with a scentific based habitat programme then perhaps the organiser/ landowner should have a major say in whether the news should be made public sometime in the future. Informing a local conservation group sounds fine, but I think most have very limited budgets these days and the management needed may not be available.
Not an easy one to resolve Jack but I am sure that most of us will support whatever you do. The butterfly and habitat must come first, but if sufficient controls were in place I suspect that most members of this forum would take the opportunity to visit.
Head now firmly back below the parapet.

[Jack Harrison]

I hope to be having dinner with my friend The Hon.Sir Charles Fortesque-Barrington-Rothschild KGB, NBG * early in the New Year so will ask him then. However, Sir Charles is elderly and profoundly deaf so it might be difficult to make him understand. However his son-in-law The Lord Walter Bernstein-Smythe of Ashton * (a larger-than-life fellow always known as The Big Wally) should be at the Dinner and might appreciate the situation rather better. There is hope that arrangements for members of ukb to visit the Chequered Skipper locality next May might be concluded during a convivial evening. If those arrangements are not forthcoming, maybe a visit to the hostelry named after the butterfly that is close to Lord Walter's ancestral home would be a suitable alternative.

Jack

* Debunk's Peerage