www.ukbutterflies.co.uk

Felix wrote:I have apologised without reserve for my abrasive, aggressive and somewhat bullish approach to her initial post in this this discussion.

Just as i have apologised for not being clearer in the first place

Felix wrote:Through the likes of Gillian, the future of butterfly conservation (lower-case intended) in this country is in safe hands.

No pressure then!!! I think the future of Butterfly Conservation and the preservation of each of the British species will ultimately be down to those individuals who are motivated and passionate enough to make a difference.

Thanks for the plug btw

Gill

This is turning into a love-in.

David M wrote:This is turning into a love-in.

I think it's recognition that we're all pushing in the same direction. I wonder what the next hot potato will be?

Cheers,

- Pete

Pete Eeles wrote:

David M wrote:This is turning into a love-in.

I think it's recognition that we're all pushing in the same direction. I wonder what the next hot potato will be?

Cheers,

- Pete

Butterflies in cuisine?


After all, crickets are a delicacy in Vietnam.

I find it fascinating that this discussion often raises it's head, and invariably follows a similar course.

In the end we usually get a general consensus that-

1/ Not everyone with a net is catching butterflies.
2/ Not everyone catching butterflies is going to kill and set them.
3/ Killing butterflies for fun is not OK.
4/ Sometimes killing butterflies is sort of OK.
5/ Nets are not acceptable without a permit on Nature Reserves.
6/ If you see someone using a net, ask them what they are doing.
7/ We all love butterflies, and all have their best interests at heart, both at individual and species level.
8/ It might have seemed that we were all disagreeing with each other, but we weren't really.

Incidentally, I have no time for Glee since they destroyed one of the finest soft rock ballads of all time - Don't Stp Believing by Journey.
Have a listen to the original!

David M wrote:

Pete Eeles wrote:

David M wrote:This is turning into a love-in.

I think it's recognition that we're all pushing in the same direction. I wonder what the next hot potato will be?

Cheers,

- Pete

Butterflies in cuisine?


After all, crickets are a delicacy in Vietnam.

I've kept out of this thread as I didn't get what all the fuss was about. I saw the original uncensored post, thought "that's a bit off" and thought no more about it.

I've only seen someone in the field once with a net. I challenged him, politely, and it turned out to be someone putting butterflies into the area rather than taking them out (and he was licensed to do so). We had a nice chat.

Going back to David M's post, one thing which never lets us down is human stupidity! This bloke's a complete @rse! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qA7QFfnMYPc

And I can't find fault with Glee, I've been a gleek since the first episode.

Now that the heat has gone out of this debate, I wonder what species occur at 2700m. Maybe Glandon and Alpine Blues, also Small Blues which seem to be the most highly adaptive of species, Clouded Yellow and an Erebia ringlet or two, maybe Sooty Ringlet.

I visited three locations at over 2300m (Col de la Lombarde, Col de la Cayolle, Col d’Izoard) last year in the first half of July and saw very little at the actual Cols, although just below the Cols at 2000m or so there were excellent numbers of species and high densities. I did see a few Dusky Grizzled Skippers at 2400m en route to the Col Agnel but these hardy little beasts were all that seemed to be flying.

Has anyone seen anything flying in Europe at higher than 2400m? (Guy?)

I think a thread elsewhere was discussing temperatures necessary for butterflies to fly. I find that high altitude species will fly in the early morning at 2000m at temperatures as low as 8 or 10 degrees C as long as the sun is shining brightly.

Incidentally, would anyone want to stay in a tent at 2700m? I suspect the overnight temperatures on a clear night would be very cold indeed.

Rogerdodge

Very well summed up, I'm in total agreement as is probably everyone else.

Susie the bloke is a complete idiot (this is the polite version).

Maybe it was simply a hoax designed to cause the kind of reaction that it ended up getting.

Has UKButterflies got its first 'troll'?

Susie wrote:This bloke's a complete @rse! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qA7QFfnMYPc

Monarch butterflies harbour compounds known as cardenolides which originate from the larval food plant ingested by the larvae and subsequently stored within the insect's bodies. The cardenolide provides an effective defence against predation.

The effects of these compounds on human beings (usually through oleander poisoning) include: severe gastric upset, internal hemorrhaging resulting in bloody diarrhoea , adverse effects on the electrical conduction system of the heart (aka 'heart block') and in theory death, should enough of the compound be ingested.

In conclusion I strongly believe that we should encourage this ugly little turd to consume as many monarch butterflies as he can in a short space of time. Perhaps the results could be put on Face-Tube (or whatever the medium is called) for our enjoyment.

Felix.

I only picked up this thread this morning.

I also have a net bought it several years ago but never got round to using it for anything other than rescuing a butterfly from the greenhouse. It defied all other attempts to be rescued!

Also I think my daughter used it once to remove a dragonfly which was in my neighbour's house. They do have their uses.

Serious mothers need to have nets, serious entomologists doing serious work need to have nets - I am neither of those so prefer to use my eyes to identify buttterflies. Although saying that I will still retain moths and give them to someone else to identify - and that will require the chop in some cases.

What did cross my mind was that if Pete posts the location in a seperate thread and then removes it say 12 hours later - we can arrange a trip there and thwart the toe rag and his likeminded toe rag mates. Maybe if it illegal in that country we can get them arrested - we know when they are going?

Liz

In answer to Roger's query about butterflies above 2400 m in Europe: don't forget the Sierra Nevada, where several species comfortably exceed that altitude, and not only alpine specialists. I saw our homely Wall at around 3000m. and several Small Tortoiseshells at the summit of Pico de Veleta at 3398m. By the way the location mentioned for the proposed expedition is in one of the Central Asian republics of the former Soviet Union.

Misha

I use an aerial net frequently, for diptera and hymenoptera. It is an essential tool when you're sampling or recording fast flying insects that may be only a few millimetres in body length. A sweep net is also a valuable tool, although I would be surprised if anyone mistook such a robust bit of kit as something that one might use to ensnare a butterfly.

This is why my initial reaction was swift and fierce; the automatic assumption that a net is being used to catch butterflies. Invariably I would imagine that it is not.

Permits for the use of nets are easily obtained, and in the absence of such a licence, the majority of site managers and wardens in my experience are only too happy to have a copy of your species list in exchange for verbal permission. This is often irrelevant however as the majority of the well known sites have been done to death, the real excitement is in recording in an area where few if any records exist. Porton Down in Wiltshire is one such locality, where surprisingly very little research has been carried out into the value of the site for anything other than the larger lepidoptera.

The only thing that I shall add to this debate is that I am always amazed that the recreational use of moth traps does not attract the same ire as the use of a net to briefly subdue a butterfly. It is, I suppose, all a matter of association (by which I mean the mental association of a net with a cabinet of set specimens) and perception.

Felix.

I have nothing to add about nets - it's all been said before.

Lovely pictures Gill and commentary to go with them.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/_viator

Your landscapes. HDR techniques or just graduated/polariser filter? I just want to know how to get similar results.

Jack

ChrisC wrote:Does the Natural History Museum still collect? do we condone them?

Of course Chris, the BMNH has a working collection, well many working collections in fact, and are still acquiring voucher specimens all the time for research, as are other such important institutions such as the National Museum of Wales which performs pioneering work into hemiptera, amongst other things.

My suggestion would be to read the interview with the Collections Manager of the BMNH here which briefly touches upon the functions of the BMNH collection, and if still sceptical about why a collection needs to exist and why it is being continually added to, take a trip up to London and talk to the staff, they will be only too happy to enlighten you, and even (by prior appointment) show you around whichever part of the collection interests you in particular.

Felix.

Felix wrote:The only thing that I shall add to this debate is that I am always amazed that the recreational use of moth traps does not attract the same ire as the use of a net to briefly subdue a butterfly.

A-ha! Someone else who shares my thoughts on the subject. In all my years using nets (butterfly or sweep nets) I've only ever inadvertantly killed about three moths and somehow decapitated a fast-moving dragonfly with an ill-timed swipe. And yes, I felt very bad about that. I no longer run a moth trap, but I've had ants, hornets and clumsy chafers wreaking havoc with the catch during the hours of darkness and I've seen birds queueing up for breakfast at other traps. Any MV trap user will know that many moths, especially some of the micro families, will quite literally burn out whilst the trap is running - leaving a collection of tiny trashed wings in the botton of the trap. Burning moth scales have a quite unique smell! Then there are the dangers to the trapper, irradiation, blindness, electrocution, sinking in peat bogs by night...the bloodthirsty lynch mobs...

Moths are very in vogue at present. I suspect that in a few decades time MV traps will be viewed in much the same light (pun not intended) as collecting birds with shotguns.

Felix wrote:Permits for the use of nets are easily obtained, and in the absence of such a licence, the majority of site managers and wardens in my experience are only too happy to have a copy of your species list in exchange for verbal permission.

In my experience this is an accurate statement. I've netted on SSSIs and LNRs with such verbal permission. I've also been approached and (usually!) politely been asked "what are you catching with that thing?" So far I've never had a problem, although I was advised not to bring my net on a BC walk once (I was hoping to sweep for micro's), only to find that the leader and two others present brought theirs!

Potentially more worrying though is this situation - I spent many many (many...) hours searching for Psychids on tree trunks in various wooded areas across Surrey, all for the forthcoming county atlas. Usually by myself. My technique is simple - stand about 18inches or less from a tree trunk and examine it in minute detail. I often become absorbed in my 'hunt' and this can cause issues. Imagine the young lady walking her dog through the woods who suddenly sees a 6ft skinhead 'hiding' behind a nearby tree. Yep, I've had the police check me out a couple of times so far...thankfully my ever-present notebook and willingness to show the suspicious officer what a Psychid looks like have always managed to get me off the hook!

So all those who use a net in public spaces should probably expect the occasional enquiry into what they're up to.

All those who hunt Psychids in public spaces need to do so either very very early in the morning before anybody wakes up or be very convincing in their explanation, lol!

Gibster.

Getting permission to remove any fauna or flora from a SSSI, isn't as straight foreword as one might think. The land owner has to be granted permission from NE, before they can hand it on to you.

There was a collective oops at one conservation HQ when they discovered this.

Regards Gruditch

Gruditch wrote:Getting permission to remove any fauna or flora from a SSSI, isn't as straight foreword as one might think. The land owner has to be granted permission from NE, before they can hand it on to you.

No worries there, Gruditch. All species data gathering, whether via casual observation or trapping was done with the full consent of the site owners (the borough council), English Nature (as it was then), Surrey Wildlife Trust and others. As was any planned practical conservation work, habitat restoration work, habitat improvements, changes of use, access improvements, pond stabilisation, use of professional entomological consultants, introduction of a grazing regime...the list goes on! But, in this instance, everything was very much approved before works began. And thanks (in part) to the use of nets and traps, Epsom Common's designation as a SSSI has been bolstered to that of a LNR - hopefully helping to safeguard it's future.

Gibster.

hi felix, i was just trying to make a point that not all collectors are bad. they have their place and uses as i mentioned.
And i have done the tour round the Darwin Centre. I was Amazed to see all the red Jars that indicated that it was THE named specimen.
I'm also only too aware of how important keeping voucher specimens are, only had photos of what could only be Zaraea aenea (sawfly) larvae from my old garden but no voucher so no record. would have been only the 2nd British record too. instead, hopefully it went on it's merry way and turned into an adult.
i am also a net user, Being a moth-er too i use a net around my light in the garden but i don't dissect but if i ever do i can see myself getting into spiders

Chris

Gibster wrote: A-ha! Someone else who shares my thoughts on the subject. In all my years using nets (butterfly or sweep nets) I've only ever inadvertantly killed about three moths and somehow decapitated a fast-moving dragonfly with an ill-timed swipe. And yes, I felt very bad about that. I no longer run a moth trap, but I've had ants, hornets and clumsy chafers wreaking havoc with the catch during the hours of darkness and I've seen birds queueing up for breakfast at other traps. Any MV trap user will know that many moths, especially some of the micro families, will quite literally burn out whilst the trap is running - leaving a collection of tiny trashed wings in the botton of the trap. Burning moth scales have a quite unique smell! Then there are the dangers to the trapper, irradiation, blindness, electrocution, sinking in peat bogs by night...the bloodthirsty lynch mobs...

Moths are very in vogue at present. I suspect that in a few decades time MV traps will be viewed in much the same light (pun not intended) as collecting birds with shotguns.
Gibster.

You missed off falling down great big holes from your list of moffing hazards, as happened to one chap at Bovingdon Brick Pits, much to my amusement. I've fried more than a few moths in my time and one of the reasons I don't have a trap now (although I keep thinking about getting another one) is that it doesn't seem fair to kill stuff just for the fun of it because I don't take it to seriously and there is no scientific reason for me to do it, I'm not adding to anyone's knowledge base.