www.ukbutterflies.co.uk

David M wrote: I'm interested to know why Large Heath only occurs from mid-Wales northwards despite seemingly ideal conditions being present further south, eg in S. Wales and Exmoor/Dartmoor region.

Large Heath is dependent on its larval foodplant, Harestail Cotton-grass, growing at sufficient density over a sufficient area (the day-feeding larva showing very strong cryptsis against the leaf-sheath) & a nectar source, most notably Cross-leaved Heath (though this is not necessarily an essential part of its ecology). No other species of Cotton-grass is ecologically acceptable in no matter in what quantity, although the species feeds well on Common Cotton-grass, various other sedges, plus rushes, and a large variety of grass. Dartmoor and Exmoor do not currently have the required habitat in any sort of density. As for South Wales I would at least like some detailed information to provide an educated opinion, e.g. locations and photos of habitat you think might be acceptable. It’s somewhere I’ve not studied, but would like to bet that any potential locality, to the south of its current Welsh sites, is simply not viable. Only one, relatively, very small area of extant habitat exists in the south of England; on the Dorset /Hampshire heathland (data via Phase 1 & 2 Natural England Surveys). It is certainly not, as commonly imagined a "northern species", only an insect whose habitat is northern on the island of Great Britain.

Martin

Paul Wetton wrote:I therefore, agree that in certain circumstances we probably should be introducing or more specifically re-introducing species. I think that protocol of some sort should be followed and if so this should be a protocol designed by the so called experst, ecologists, butterfly experts etc and I would include you in this catagory Martin as you are an expert breeder and have thorough knowledge of butterfly ecology (I assume).

And back to the humour:-

STOP PRESS: Just heard on the News that the East Moldavian President has announced East Moldavia intends to send a man to the moon and return him safely back to East Moldavia before the decade is out. No plans are available on how they hope to get to the moon but their scientific secretariat has unanimously decided on the colour scheme for their space vehicle (blue, green & pink; the colours of the Moldavian Flag). Although, whether to take a wood-burning stove, so the Moldavonaut can prepare and enjoy the national dish of smoked squirrel on the moon, has divided the Food Standards Sub-committee. The President, himself, has written to NASA hoping to combine their not inconsiderable protocols in this venture, but NASA has failed to respond. I cannot think why?

Martin

Martin White wrote:

David M wrote: I'm interested to know why Large Heath only occurs from mid-Wales northwards despite seemingly ideal conditions being present further south, eg in S. Wales and Exmoor/Dartmoor region.

Large Heath is dependent on its larval foodplant, Harestail Cotton-grass, growing at sufficient density over a sufficient area (the day-feeding larva showing very strong cryptsis against the leaf-sheath) & a nectar source, most notably Cross-leaved Heath (though this is not necessarily an essential part of its ecology). No other species of Cotton-grass is ecologically acceptable in no matter in what quantity, although the species feeds well on Common Cotton-grass, various other sedges, plus rushes, and a large variety of grass. Dartmoor and Exmoor do not currently have the required habitat in any sort of density. As for South Wales I would at least like some detailed information to provide an educated opinion, e.g. locations and photos of habitat you think might be acceptable. It’s somewhere I’ve not studied, but would like to bet that any potential locality, to the south of its current Welsh sites, is simply not viable. Only one, relatively, very small area of extant habitat exists in the south of England; on the Dorset /Hampshire heathland (data via Phase 1 & 2 Natural England Surveys). It is certainly not, as commonly imagined a "northern species", only an insect whose habitat is northern on the island of Great Britain.

Martin

Thanks for the detailed response, Martin.

There's no blanket bog in S. Wales, but there are lowland raised bogs of the type found at Meathop Moss near the Cumbrian coast. I haven't visited any of them so I don't know if Harestail Cottongrass grows there.

I understand what you mean about not being a 'northern' species. I notice it's range in France is decidedly east-leaning (although it does appear to be totally absent from southern Europe, even where suitable habitat may exist at altitude).

Martin

Dartmoor and Exmoor do not currently have the required habitat in any sort of density.

The High Moorland blanket bogs on Dartmoor have a very high density of Hare's Tail Cottongrass, together with Cross-Leaved Heath. The habitat may well be suitable for Large Heath, if a little exposed.
However, I would prefer it if you didn't come down here and muck about with our ecology thank you very much.
p.s. I understood that Common Cottongrass E. angustifolium was also used - particularly in N. Yorks..

You would hope that the SSSI status of Dartmoor and Exmoor would prevent any such unauthorised introductions

Regards Gruditch

From British Butterflies, 1905, by W.S.Coleman. Jack

Aah...the days when people took punctuation seriously.

Thanks for that snippet, Jack.

It's a little bizarre that a parallel discussion should recur over 100 years later.

Jack

Rogerdodge wrote:Martin

p.s. I understood that Common Cottongrass E. angustifolium was also used - particularly in N. Yorks..

I remember the ecology work which supported this view and I can assure you it was flawed.

Martin

Rogerdodge wrote:

Dartmoor and Exmoor do not currently have the required habitat in any sort of density.

The High Moorland blanket bogs on Dartmoor have a very high density of Hare's Tail Cottongrass, together with Cross-Leaved Heath. The habitat may well be suitable for Large Heath, if a little exposed.

Dear Rogerdodge,

You are right and I am wrong. There are goodly amounts of data which suggests Dartmoor is very interesting for Large Heath. There are, however, two facets which perhaps you might not be acquainted. Old records for Dartmoor do exist and I possess the largest private database of botanical information for the area in question.

Records per Harry T. Eales, c.1998, work: - “Sites in England and Wales from which the Large Heath Butterfly, C. Tullia. Müller. has been recorded since its discovery as a British species in 1795.”, include: - SX5073, Hares Down Moor, date unknown, via NCC files, Tavistock, ISR. Considered by Harry to be a confusion in place names between the nearby Whitchurch and the one where the butterfly still occurs in Shropshire. I’m not so sure. And: - SX59, (near) Okehampton, pre 1876, H. Rowland-Brown, Etudes de Lepidopterologie compree. (1912) 7: 115-6. Bizarrely, this is what Harry has to say on this latter record: - “In view of the doubts cast upon the original recorders list by others, this record must be considered as, at best doubtful. [And,] in view of the fact that there is no confirmation of this record from later recorders and also the considerable distance to the nearest known sites, it would appear that this record should be considered erroneous, unless further evidence is forthcoming. However, Martin C. White [oneself] has examined this area and has found that there are at least two sites with suitable habitat within the forest which may have supported tullia in the past.”

Your Dartmoor ideas seem to back my supposed intensive survey-work. However, I’ve absolutely no recollection of ever visiting Dartmoor or coming up with any two such sites. To say the least I’m flabbergasted. Though, with my interest now well and truly peeked I decided to try and find the best two paper sites for Dartmoor using my very impressive botanical database and an especial program. Maybe they just might match yours?

The programmable results offered a truly staggering 80 Dartmoor sites with four major extant Devon Large Heath occurring Axiophytes being concomitant. The quartet of plant species ordered in importance being: - Hare’s-tail Cottongrass, Cross-leaved Heath, Bog Asphodel & Round-leaved Sundew. To further clarify these results another fourteen axiophytes were added, again, arranged by foremost value. All sites were then ordered by being scored firstly for axiophyte numerical superiority and subsequently, within each numerical sub-set, their priority or value. The fourteen axiophytes in order: - White Sedge, Oblong-leaved Sundew, Bog Pondweed, Many-stalked Spike-rush, Heath Spotted Orchid, Marsh St. John’s Wort, Marsh Club-rush, Black Bog-rush, Bog Pimpernel, Marsh Helleborine, Tawny Sedge, Marsh Valerian, Bogbean & Royal Fern. This then gave a positive result for the two best paper sites out of the original eighty. First with 13 axiophyte species is an area just to the north-east of Postbridge, centred on two tetrads SX68V & SX68Q. And secondly, and very interestingly, an area not too far from its supposed station at Whitchurch, being just to the west of Princetown, centred on four tetrads SX57M, SX57S, SX57L & SX57R.

Direct translocation of stock from any of the abundant Northumberland sites where the climate and therefore possible evolved morphology is similar to Dartmoor may prove ideal for a successful establishment? I can supply whatever site details anyone might wish for such work. It is doubtful if habitat wind intensity is a great cause for concern, it isn’t elsewhere, release date duly excepted, of course. Should anyone require a full listing of my priority-ordered potential Dartmoor sites and full analysis, mentioned above, please send an email address. In properly surveying a large area for Large Heath it might also just be worth considering aerial photography when Hare’s-tail Cottongrass is seeding, showing-up as white fog-patches and efficiently illustrating any habitat or introduction site much better than a paper survey or any, hard-slogged, holistic ground-work.

Best wishes

Martin White

email: martincwhite@talktalk.net

Hi Martin
Thanks so much for your detailed explanation of your findings. The scientific detail you give is surely something that organisations such as Butterfly Conservation should take more notice of. Whilst I'm against willy nilly reintroductions all over the place, the findings from your last post are surely the basis for a controlled and scientifically evaluated trial release.

I don't doubt you have similar types of findings for other species too, which again would potentially be hugely useful for conservation organisations.

Thanks again for your explanation
Paul

Jack Harrison wrote:From British Butterflies, 1905, by W.S.Coleman.

LH.jpg

Jack

Ashdown Forest has a small selection of singularly originated records for long departed Large Heath. Such information only arises here because the butterfly was introduced to the site by a certain Mr. Plastead [=Plasted], from c.1802 onwards. Likewise, he also imported continentals and released them too, including Pearly Heath & Purple-edged Copper. All these curiosities were then re-captured by the self-same person, pinned, and sold as authentic British. Not surprisingly the distribution of this material has lead to a great deal of latter-day controversy being garnered by museums. Good examples of his work are to be found at Melbourne Museum in Australia. I, myself, being fortunate enough to have examined the antipodean photographs of these incredulous captures for closer-at-home inspection. Unfortunately, trying to dissuade such an august institution of their erroneous, albeit rather studious understanding of the facts, failed to meet a desired expectation.

Plastead’s activities went on for some decades hereafter, and seem to have included yet more exotic creatures and introductions to equally unlikely and luckless places as Brixton, Epping and possibly his home-town, Chelsea, therein from whose former market-garden trade his material may well have originally found import. J. C. Dale summed him up to perfection as someone who “cannot be looked upon in the character of a trustworthy personage.” As such, I’m highly disinclined to follow in the footsteps of Mr. Plastead or indeed remotely suggest that Ashdown Forest is, or within recorded history, ever has been suitable for Large Heath. And, clearly, anyone who might like to believe otherwise is not correctly bolted to reality.

Martin White

Unathorised releases of butterflies into areas they haven't previously occupied!!
There ought to be a law against it!

Rogerdodge wrote:Unathorised releases of butterflies into areas they haven't previously occupied!!
There ought to be a law against it!

Apart from my very first two or three naive introductions (1967-73), none of my releases have been unauthorised, nor in so much as can I deduce to places where such creatures have previously not been found. Only the hysteria principally furnished by the complete ignorance of a former debate on this particular forum would seem to suggest otherwise. I agree with you whole-heartedly, apart from the fact that your spelling and grammar seem to have been provided by lunatics from the local asylum.

Martin White

Martin, this part of the forum, has been put aside for members to record their activities in a Personal Diary. Your postings do not in anyway resemble a personal diary. And for the second time, if you can't refrain from resorting to personal insults, then maybe these forums are not for you.

Regards Gruditch

apart from the fact that your spelling and grammar seem to have been provided by lunatics from the local asylum.

I shan't rise to this.
You should just pray that we never meet.

Everything moved into 1 place - consider this Martin's "diary" (even though it isn't a diary!).

I don't know what other forums you might visit, Martin, but we've been given no choice (given your outspoken comments) to lock this thread. I'm all for freedom of speech and all that, but I think it's time to call it a day here; the consensus is that you've crossed too many lines.

Cheers,

- Pete

Please note that Martin White passed away on October 12th 2020. His diary has been retained since, despite the ‘discussion’, there may some insights that will be valuable in the future.

Cheers,

- Pete