Red Data Book and Orthoptera

It looks like they are preparing a new edition of the Red Book of the Russian Federation ???

It's high time for the deadline - I already wrote at the REO congress the year before last about the surprisingly small number of insect species listed in the CC of the Russian Federation, especially for the territory of the European part of Russia (we found 12 species from the list of the Russian Federation in our region in 2005 when our CC was released). Which is ridiculously small for such a developed and killed (in ecological terms) territory!!!

The main recommendation for authors-compilers is to let them carefully study the regional CC. Most of the publications were prepared by professional entomologists, and there are many interesting species and facts. What should undoubtedly be taken into account in the new edition of the CC RF-otherwise we risk again to protect the xylocope or carpenter bee and say the sailboat polyxena is really an endangered species in the Russian Federation we throw out (!!? mind boggling!) "overboard" - to be torn to pieces by collectors. In addition, it is necessary to correct the list of species to be considered on the terr. Russian Federation-remove nafik from the notorious swallowtail! Then I insert it all who are not lazy in their regional CC. Ugh...

On the subject of erect wings:
1. the steppe fat man is a really endangered species (although it seems that you can't just take him with a rush... special RESEARCH is NEEDED).
2. Steppe dybka - do not believe anyone who tells you that this is a common and "restored" species in nature. There they say and found in Tatarstan-aha settled pancake. We have a difficult situation in the Penza Region - we have been looking at the steppes for a long time and very closely (see my branch - The concept of protected areas until 2020). So we have a lot of abandoned fields (not fertile land) - but what should she do there in the impassable weeds standing by the wall? As there were isolated areas of its habitat, they remained along the leaves of gullies, salt marshes, sandy edges of hogs (near steppe areas) and settled slopes... it is simply not able to crawl into the "new lands". Where our cattle are grazed (south-east of the region) from century to century and the steppe is more like an English lawn... she will not survive in such places at all... etc. etc. (I need to write my own article on the rack in the SOFTWARE probably-the material is quite enough). That is, as dybka lived in our country 20 years ago in the south and southwest of the region, so it lives, I am happy about this...

3. Addition of the list of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. It's about time!!! The question is not easy, much is missing ... alas.
a). Barbitistes constrictus-pine sawtail. Interesting view - I looked at myself specifically (looking at the new edition of the CC MO), alas, I haven't found it yet...
B). I won't say anything about the seahorse - I don't know such a thing...
C). In the KK of the Leningrad region, I liked the species - Broad – winged Rattle-Bryodema tuberculatum (Fabricius, 1775). A really endangered species everywhere...
And izofii-look at the CC of the Belgorod region, probably the only regional publication where Prisny straight-winged insects are well represented.
And take at least the European part of the Russian Federation - how many really rare and little-known species-isofia Boldyreva (Saratov) for example... I remember that no one has ever put it into synonyms yet... etc. there is much to discuss... especially in the south of the Volga region and the Orenburg region...

Here is a photo of our dybka and entomologist Sergey Shibaev.
Yes, we tried twice to breed dybok in the insectarium - but no one came out of the eggs...?

This post was edited by Penzyak - 01.06.2012 13: 40

Pictures:

___________________2011.jpg — (146.99к)

C B. constrictus here is what is not clear: whether the species is really rare, or just little available for collection. I have caught it 4 times in my entire life (Novgorod and Leningrad regions) - and almost always after strong winds (apparently blowing grasshoppers from the crowns).

As for Chorthippus pullus , in the North-West it is found in certain stations (xerophytic areas with sparse vegetation on sandy soils near pine forests) and moreover not everywhere geographically. I don't know how widespread it is further south.

Well, as for the rattle-here you need to know how rare it is in the steppes of the Southern Urals and Siberia. By the way, it seems to have two subspecies - nominative and diluta - and each one should be dealt with separately.

This post was edited by PVOzerski - 15.05.2012 21: 01

B. constrictus, judging by what I was told by people who were looking for it by signals, is not so rare, just extremely inconspicuous and really keeps only in the crowns. I'm not sure if this is a good candidate.

The Latin name of the fat man in last revision groups-Bradyporus (Callimenus) multituberculatus F.-W.

I agree with Oleg on dybka.

Ratchet really need to look at the subspecies-diluta beyond the Urals and up to the yard is a real banal, which is found even in large cities (I caught it, for example, in Irkutsk itself). The nominative, it seems to me, is similar to mnemosyne - it is distributed very locally, it is not easy to find, but in its "points" it reaches a normal number.

What I would personally add is Ameles heldreichi. The species was discovered recently, and it is not entirely clear whether it extends to the east, or it was simply "overlooked" in the last N decades. BUT-there are only two points so far, both of them are interesting biotopes, moreover, they can really be under threat in the very near future. I can write an essay on this type in the CC.

It is also worth remembering the North Caucasus, which is simply teeming with relatively narrow endemics. As examples, it is enough to look at the CC of the Krasnodar Territory, where Stolyarov managed to enter information about some of these species. Stations of some of these species may already be under threat due to the implementation of the "Olympic" and other similar projects. We know at least Savitsky and Mikhailenko of the Caucasian right-winged birds, and we can (imho, we need) to involve them in our work.

This post was edited by Dracus - 05/16/2012 02: 39

Broad-winged rattle-Bryodema tuberculatum (Fabricius, 1775) somewhere I read in Europe a really reducing species (in Germany from a common and widespread species, a pest!? - it has become very rare and there is no forecast for the restoration of the population and is no longer expected - like a number of other once common species...).
In the European part, the nominative species is really rare - in the Penza region, I know one point on the Volga Upland (I always try to catch straight-winged birds in new places), the southern open slopes (sandy) of pine forests and mixed forests are obvious fragments of the past. In the Volga region, many have no or old finds... In the summer, I want to specifically search in August in the east of the region in suitable biotopes.

Eugene Are you talking about Ameles heldreichi-Heldreich's Pilgrim?
http://images.yandex.ru/yandsearch?text=Am...lr=49&noreask=1
And where is it known on the territory of the Russian Federation ?

Regarding Ch. pullus: for Germany it is listed as an endangered species, for the Czech Republic-as rare, protected in Italy. It tends towards sandy heaths, mainly in the mountains in Germany.

Total: while the following candidates are looming:
1) Bradyporus multituberculatus
2) Saga pedo
3) Bryodemella tuberculata tuberculata
4) Chorthippus pullus
5) Ameles heldreichii

I'll look at the Caucasian species separately.

Bogomolov is a rare species in the cultural Center of the Saratov region, the author of essays is V. V. Anikin.

In general, there are quite a lot of rare right-winged birds in the Russian Federation - BUT, again, the European part of the Russian Federation will remain as "orphan Kazan" - at least make a separate publication!?? Over there, botanists have joined forces to take part in the Volga Region Plant Control Center - WELL DONE! We are so far away - the late Isaev A. Yu., wanted to make such a Red Book on insects of the Volga region... bright memory to him.

And I can't understand: Decticus nigrescens, this is a setup or a real species, since it is described, then why its findings are not mentioned anywhere at all. I don't know if I wrote it in the subject line, but it might still be interesting. And species from the genus Glyphonotus, I think I read somewhere that they are also rare animals, and even about an endangered species somewhere it was written, or it has nothing to do with Russia? For example http://www.photo.kg/window/51116

Is Gampsocleis gratiosa worth paying attention to?

Bogomolov is a rare species in the cultural Center of the Saratov region, the author of essays is V. V. Anikin.

They are rare only in the Saratov region, and even there... I'm talking about completely different species, and some of them haven't even been found yet.

You need to be careful when approaching regional QCs, many copies are broken, and it is already clear to everyone that they are often not written at a high level, especially with regard to straight-winged ones. There are rare exceptions. Also, the species can have a consistently low population density (like the Bolivaria in most of the Russian part of its range), or be rare, but live in hard-to-reach places (like the Kurentsov grasshopper) - what is the point of entering them in the CC?

I also still believe that glyphonotus is a purely Central Asian genus, which is not found in the fauna of Russia. And that's why you don't need to add Ceraeocercus, by the way. As far as I remember, this species enters Russia at the edge of its range somewhere in the Lower Volga region, large and spectacular... We are talking about the CC of Russia, and not about the IUCN World Biota.

Now about the Red Book of the Krasnodar Territory recommended to me. I found it on the Internet and counted in it 10 types of orthopteroids. I present the list as it is:

SATUNIN'S WINGLESS FILLY Podisma satunini Uvarov, 1916: 3 "Rare" - 3, RD.
UVAROV'S WINGLESS FILLY Podisma uvarovi Ramme, 1926: 2 "Vulnerable" - 2, UV.
BOLIVARIA SHORT-WINGED Bolivaria brachyptera (Pallas, 1773): 7 "Specially controlled" — 7, SK. Included in Appendix 2 to the Red Book of the Russian Federation.
DYBKA STEPPE Saga pedo (Pallas, 1771): 7 "Specially controlled" - 7, SK. In the Red Data Book of the Russian Federation, it is classified as "2-Declining in number".
Isophya kalishevskii Adelung, 1907: 3 "Rare" - 3, RD.
CAUCASIAN CAVE DWELLER Dolichopoda euxina Semenov, 1901: 1B "Endangered" - 1B, UI.
LONG-TAILED SAWTAIL Poecilimon bifenestratus Miram, 1929: 2 "Vulnerable" - 2, UV.
TOLSTUN STEPPE (MULTITUBERCULATE SHAROGOLOV, SHAROGLAV) Bradyporus multituberculatus (Fischer-Waldheim, 1833): 0 "Probably extinct in the region" - 0, VI.
Schizonotinus forficalis Bey-Bienko, 1951: 3 "Rare" - 3, RD.
EMPUSA STRIATA Empusa fasciata Brulle, 1836: 2 "Vulnerable" - 2, UV.

And here is something else (selectively) from the Red Books of other regions:
Rostov region:
The spotted-winged mantis Iris polystictica (Fischer-Waldheim, 1816): 4 is a rare, poorly studied species whose numbers are declining.

What do I think about this list? - and the fact that for sure you can safely add a lot of endemic Caucasian species of grasshoppers and locusts to it. However, in my opinion, just reading about gathering places in monographs of the 50s of the last century is not the best approach. I would venture to suggest that for the time being we limit ourselves to this: we should offer to transfer all the straight-winged birds from this publication to the CC of the Russian Federation, and as for the praying mantises, it is up to Evgeny's discretion. Perhaps we should also risk adding the genus Phlocerus to the list of locusts , since they are endemic to the Caucasus and, moreover, have an original habit?

Also, I'm thinking about Paracyphoderris erebeus. Unfortunately, I'm afraid I won't be able to get in touch with Sergey Storozhenko (since the whole Red Book story fell on me quite recently, and even with the deadline on the 20th).

IMHO, not to include Paracyphoderrhis in the red book is just strange, to say the least.
There is also Cryptocercus relictus , a relict cockroach from the Far East.

Actually a quote: "Also, I'm thinking about Paracyphoderris erebeus. Unfortunately, I'm afraid I won't be able to get in touch with Sergey Storozhenko (since the whole Red Book story fell on me quite recently, and even with the deadline on the 20th)." - gives an answer to the question, so what are the roots of this nonsense?

I ask Pavel Viktorovich not to take the second paragraph personally! I meant that in a situation where very serious work falls "out of the blue", with deadlines "until yesterday" - you simply can't expect acceptable results!

This post was edited by Zlopastnyi Brandashmyg - 05/18/2012 17: 52

I started compiling the list. Got caught up in the formalities. We need to test the views on the site http://iucn.info/ - but this requires more or less accurate data on the abundance of the species, its dynamics, as well as on the range. With the same Paracyphoderris, nonsense comes out, because many indicators are simply unknown.

And almost all types are the same... How about putting the category "by eye"?

In general, this morning I sent this list::

Bradyporus multituberculatus
Saga pedo
Paracyphoderris erebeus
Dolichopoda euxina
Isophya kalischevskii
Isophya stepposa
Isophya modesta rossica
Isophya altaica
Poecilimon ukrainicus
Poecilimon bifenestratus
Schizonotinus forficalis
Hypsopedes kurentzovi
Podisma satunini
Podisma uvarovi
Bryodemella tuberculata tuberculata
Chorthippus pullus
Baculum ussurianum
Ectobius duskei
Cryptocercus relictus
Ameles heldreichii
Grylloblattella pravdini
Grylloblattella sayanensis
Grylloblattina djakonovi
Galloisiana ussuriensis
Haploembia solieri
Forficula vicaria

In the preface, I pointed out this: "The list was compiled by P. V. Ozersky (Department of Biology, Herzen State Pedagogical University, St. Petersburg), E. O. Shcherbakov (Faculty of Biology, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow), L. N. Anisyutkin (Zoological Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences, St. Petersburg), O. A. Polumordvinov (Penza Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences). Entomological Society)".

Empusa fasciata forgotten?

I forgot, I repent. And the pryamoptera should have been reviewed much more thoroughly. I think the list is very incomplete. Duc for all 5 nights-that was it.

What's next?

I don't know the details yet. I sent the material as requested. But from the conversation on the phone, I realized that the next step, apparently, is to write detailed essays on types, and there will be an opportunity not only for me to work (as I understand it, the authorship will be indicated).

Yes, it would be good to know about deadlines at this stage in advance.

That's how we need to approve lists of insects for the CC RF together and in a constructive dialogue. After all, it often turns out that the authors of essays are very superficially aware of the situation with the spread of certain species in Russia. And here an important role can be played by collectors - curious people and ubiquitous (mobile) koi not for the sake of money (mostly!) and for the sake of knowledge, they do their own research and collect insects.

Essays (list of types) Prisny on pryamoptera from the Belgorod region studied? Highly recommend - I think some of the best in the European part of the Russian Federation.

Yes, and what is not included (will not be included) in the essays of the new edition of the CC RF is quite suitable for the list of " Types requiring attention ...".

This post was edited by Penzyak - 05/21/2012 11: 11

Decticus nigrescens is a real species. See the monograph by S. Y. Storozhenko. I even have several copies from the Amur region. Zina definitely has it.
Glyphonotus was first found in 2003 and this year in the Orenburg region in the ROC. Troitsk (border with Kazakhstan). Definitely the type must be in the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation.

I doubt that Paracyphoderris erebeus will be included in the Russian Tax Code. Yes, this species has a limited distribution, being a conditional endemic to the central part of the Bureinsky Highlands within the Khabarovsk Territory. But in its habitats, it is not uncommon, occurring almost everywhere within the specified boundaries. And it inhabits almost all mountain taiga and high-mountain complexes. And its populations are practically not threatened by anything - the area as a whole is poorly developed, there are few mining developments and cutting areas (in those mountains, it is not very profitable to cut down the forest because of its inaccessibility for equipment and transportation and low quality). Therefore, I don't see any sense in special protection of this species. For that matter, the Tax Code of the Russian Federation should include a lot of insect species that have a limited distribution or are known from the territory of the Russian Federation from rare finds. The Talmud will be thick.

What have you heard about the new edition of the Red Book of Russia volume Animals? Maybe they slowed down because of the appearance of a new subject of the Crimea? After all, there are many rare and endemic insects there???

This is Bolshakov L. (from someone else's computer - in the fields).
Dear Oleg,
Those who run the CC RF do not care about insects in general and Crimean in particular. Moreover, they do not know anything about the insects of the Crimea.
After all, they put their project up for discussion not so long ago and now they regret it very much - in terms of entomology, it is scientifically untenable and was criticized by the entomological community to the nines. The publication of such nonsense in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation will lead to the fact that we will be forced to harshly criticize it in the press and mass media as an anti-ecological and anti-state action. I think nothing is being heard because the Moscow pseudo-elite, which has taken over the CC of the Russian Federation, is feverishly working on the most egregious mistakes and does not want further criticism. And since they don't really know anything about insects, they dug in thoroughly.

Dear colleagues!

We need help in preparing the Red Book of the Republic of Crimea.
The list of erect wings and mantises was completed a long time ago, and already approved. Its composition is as follows:
Empusa fasciata Brullé, 1836
Bolivaria brachyptera (Pallas, 1773)
Iris polystictica (Fischer-Waldheim, 1846)
Poecilimon pliginskii Miram, 1929 [=P. boldyrevi Miram, 1938]
Poecilimon schmidtii (Fieber, 1853)
Anadrymadusa retowskii (Adelung, 1907)
Saga pedo (Pallas, 1771)
Pseudomogoplistes buzantius Gorochov, 1995
Asiotmethis tauricus (Tarbinski, 1930)
Pararcyptera microptera jailensis Miram, 1927

The problem is that we don't have anyone to write the specific descriptions themselves (including two participants in this discussion who have already refused in the course of personal correspondence).

If anyone wants to help the project, please respond.

Materials are needed by November 1. Basic information about the project (such as rules for authors) is available in the attached file.

File/s:



 __________________________________.pdf

size: 4.53 mb
number of downloads: 701

That's good, I'll keep it in mind!

Dear colleagues!

We need help in preparing the Red Book of the Republic of Crimea.
The list of erect wings and mantises was completed a long time ago, and already approved. Its composition is as follows:
Empusa fasciata Brullé, 1836
Bolivaria brachyptera (Pallas, 1773)
Iris polystictica (Fischer-Waldheim, 1846)
Poecilimon pliginskii Miram, 1929 [=P. boldyrevi Miram, 1938]
Poecilimon schmidtii (Fieber, 1853)
Anadrymadusa retowskii (Adelung, 1907)
Saga pedo (Pallas, 1771)
Pseudomogoplistes buzantius Gorochov, 1995
Asiotmethis tauricus (Tarbinski, 1930)
Pararcyptera microptera jailensis Miram, 1927

The problem is that we don't have anyone to write the specific descriptions themselves (including two participants in this discussion who have already refused in the course of personal correspondence).

If anyone wants to help the project, please respond.

Materials are needed by November 1. Basic information about the project (such as rules for authors) is available in the attached file.

There is no one to compile species descriptions for several species (an article on Saga pedo will require a lot of your own new knowledge), but there was no one to assess the state of populations for each of the species that live on a large region scale, select those that should be included in the CC and ALREADY APPROVE the list. People are openly warned that the main decisive decision for the CC (i.e., the choice of objects of protection) was made without asking bespectacled people, by those who have nothing to say about even a few selected species, and that the scientist already does not talk about selection, but retroactively supports our brilliant decisions with his brain. And there will be hunters.

If the list was compiled by those who cannot or do not want to write specific articles even for several selected species, such a list, while preserving at least a drop of scientific ethics, cannot be considered high-quality and should be disavowed. At least not to throw water on the mill of those who have been talking for years about the incompatibility of scientific ethics with the entomological part of the CC.

This post was edited by A. J. Elez - 23.06.2015 01: 02

I have also encountered similar phenomena more than once.
So, a couple of dragonfly species were added to one red list. And they asked me to rate what to write about them in the CC. It turned out that there was nothing to write - one of these types is the ubiquitous synanthropic sentinel - emperor (however, NEVER marked at that time in that region), the second is taken from the ceiling at all (although possible, but not confirmed by any material).
The second case is similar - one of our colleagues suggested several dozen species of bees and flies to the CSTO. But I couldn't write a single essay and couldn't even organize consultations with specialists. But since I was the editor of the KKTO, all these types had to be thrown out of the list for lack of prepared information.

Dear colleagues. I don't really know what stage everything is in. However, for individual species (for example, Saga pedo, Dolichopoda euxina), a large amount of data has been accumulated on distribution, some features of biology, etc.in the territory of the Krasnodar Territory and the Republic of Adygea. Some of them are reflected in publications, while others have not yet been published anywhere. If the authors of the essays are interested, I will be happy to help.

I would not be too old to be ironic and say that we know very well the ecology and biology of the" fairly common " - Saga pedo. Here in the Penza Region, I collect information by species bit by bit, keep it in terrariums, and take photos... When the USSR was in the CC, information about the biology of the species was pulled from foreign publications. And not everything is as simple with it as it may seem even to specialists in orthoptera, especially if they see the view only during expeditions to the south of the Russian Federation.
For example, if I were asked to write an essay on dybki in the Crimean CC, I would not undertake it, since I have no idea about the ecology and some aspects of the biology of the species in the Crimea. In general, it is surprising that there are no specialists on erect wings in the Crimea and even more so in the Russian Federation (!??). The group is quite well studied and there is quite a lot of literature. There is no doubt that before adding certain species to the CC list of a subject of the Russian Federation, specialists in this group are needed, and it is VERY DESIRABLE that they are local, who know many nuances of specific populations. That's why a number of specialists in the group that would not seem "funny" and abandoned this project... In general, the list of insects for the Crimean CC is good and necessary (unlike the "new" CC of the Russian Federation), good luck to you colleagues.

That's good, I'll keep it in mind!

Viewed it list of types of Crimean agricultural complexes
Here are some photos in nature I have. It was not enough, I thought, there will be more intersections with our fauna.
49. Common solpuga-Galeodes araneoides
60. The Imperial sentinel is Anax imperator
63. The short-winged Bolivaria is Bolivaria brachyptera
64. Spotted-winged iris – Iris polystictica
68. Steppe dybka-Saga pedo
78. Calosoma sycophanta (Linnaeus, 1758)
79. Ground beetle of Bessarabia-Carabus bessarabicus (Fischer von Waldheim, 1823)
80. Hungarian ground beetle-Carabus hungaricus (Fabricius, 1792)
104. Leucomigus candidatus
108. Stag beetle-Lucanus cervus
114.Scarab typhon-Scarabaeus typhon
120. Western crank spur-Acanthaclisis occitanica
125. Mantispa styriaca 135.
Peacock's eye pear-Saturnia pyri
141. Oak hawk moth-Marumba quercus
142. Proserpine hawk moth-Proserpinus proserpina
145.Pink scoop – Aedophron rhodites
154. Silver cowl – Cucullia argentina
164. Swallowtail-Papilio machaon
166. Polyxena-Zerynthia polyxena
176. Callimachus-Tomares callimachus
190. Giant scolia-Megascolia maculata
238. Purple carpenter bee-Xylocopa violacea
269.Marsh turtle-Emys orbicularis
272. Multi-colored foot-and-mouth disease-Eremias arguta
275. Yellow-bellied creeper-Dolichophis caspius
276. Poloz pallasov – Elaphe sauromates
300. Burial ground-Aquila heliaca
301. Steppe eagle-Aquila rapax
302. Barrow-Buteo rufinus
307. White-tailed eagle-Haliaeetus albicilla
312. Belladonna-Anthropoides virgo
315. Strepet – Tetrax tetrax
316. Avdotka – Burhinus oedicnemus
332. Swamp owl-Asio flammeus
333. Filin-Bubo bubo
335. Blue lark-Coracias garrulus
336. Common kingfisher-Alcedo atthis
347. Small ground squirrel-Spermophilus pygmaeus

56. Lily of the valley May-Convallaria majalis
60. Siberian copse-Scilla siberica
66. False-air iris – Iris pseudacorus
67. Low iris – Iris pumila
252. Purple mullein-Verbascum phoeniceum
258. Two-flowered tulip – Tulipa biflora

This post was edited by wise snake - 06/23/2015 12: 41

I apologize if my thoughts are "ironic". In my opinion, it is the observations of "regional" specialists, which we are, who have been monitoring protected insect species in the Krasnodar Territory and Adygea for a sufficient number of years, that should have some significance when creating essays for the CCRF.

In general, the list of types of CCRF plunges me into some shock.

There is no one to compile species descriptions for several species (an article on Saga pedo will require a lot of your own new knowledge), but there was no one to assess the state of populations for each of the species that live on a large region scale, select those that should be included in the CC and ALREADY APPROVE the list. People are openly warned that the main decisive decision for the CC (i.e., the choice of objects of protection) was made without asking bespectacled people, by those who have nothing to say about even a few selected species, and that the scientist already does not talk about selection, but retroactively supports our brilliant decisions with his brain. And there will be hunters.

If the list was compiled by those who cannot or do not want to write specific articles even for several selected species, such a list, while preserving at least a drop of scientific ethics, cannot be considered high-quality and should be disavowed. At least not to throw water on the mill of those who have been talking for years about the incompatibility of scientific ethics with the entomological part of the CC.

Well, here we go... Do you really have something to say, or is it just a flight of fancy about who made the list and how?

For your information:

1) The list was compiled by specialists-orthopterologists, candidates of sciences who worked in the Crimea, who initially planned to write essays too, but unfortunately, now they can't continue working on the project at all for reasons beyond their control and ours. I have no right to explain the details, and I don't see the point.
There was an idea to remove the entire group of erect wings and mantises altogether, but it is also impossible...

2) After that, the list was sent to other, very well-known and "cool" specialists. I won't mention your last name. In general, the list was once again corrected. But they refused to write essays (or did not give an answer), because they do not know Crimea and the distribution of species in the Crimea very well. In short , what you approved is the result of a survey of all available "bespectacled people", as you put it. In total, it took three years to compile it, and we couldn't wait any longer for new enthusiastic specialists to appear, because it was time to approve the lists, and we couldn't delay them just because of the erect wings and mantises.

3) We could have written our own essays, but due to such sentiments as in your message, it was decided not to give views to those who do not have publications in the relevant groups, so that later no one would want to "disavow"the red book. Those who want to be sarcastic will always be found, judging by your reaction to my post on this forum and thanks under this reaction (probably in vain I started this here...). In addition, for example, I write 34 types for other groups, and in another two dozen - a co-author, i.e. time for experiments like probably not enough. It would be easier and faster for a specialist to do this. But if no one shows up , you'll also have to learn orthopterology...

P.S. By the way, I am an entomologist myself, Ph. D., I work as a senior researcher, and I wear glasses. So, I have a good idea of what "don't say anything" about nature protection is.

For example, if I were asked to write an essay on dybki in the Crimean CC, I would not undertake it, since I have no idea about the ecology and some aspects of the biology of the species in the Crimea. In general, it is surprising that there are no specialists on erect wings in the Crimea and even more so in the Russian Federation (!??). The group is quite well studied and there is quite a lot of literature. There is no doubt that before adding certain species to the CC list of a subject of the Russian Federation, specialists in this group are needed, and it is VERY DESIRABLE that they are local, who know many nuances of specific populations. That's why a number of specialists in the group that would not seem "funny" and abandoned this project...

I think we could find co-authors for them among local amateur field workers. One is in mind, but I haven't asked him yet, because the main author is not there...

In general, the list of insects for the Crimean CC is good and necessary (unlike the "new" CC of the Russian Federation), good luck to you colleagues.

Thank you for your kind words! We tried our best.

Well, here we go... Do you really have something to say, or is it just a flight of fancy about who made the list and how?

For your information:

1) The list was compiled by specialists-orthopterologists, candidates of sciences who worked in the Crimea, who initially planned to write essays too, but unfortunately, now they can't continue working on the project at all for reasons beyond their control and ours. I have no right to explain the details and I don't see the point....
2) After that, the list was sent to other, very well-known and "cool" specialists. I won't mention your last name. In general, the list was once again corrected. But they refused to write essays (or did not give an answer), because they do not know Crimea and the distribution of species in the Crimea very well. In short , what you approved is the result of a survey of all available "bespectacled people", as you put it.

Thank you for being aware of the specific situation and confirming with facts that my comment is absolutely "on the point". As you can see, I started from exactly the same version, and if for some reason it is a "flight of fancy", then ,as they say,"let's fly together". From your words, it also follows that now it is necessary - if not to profane the idea at all-to write articles to find someone who knows "Crimea and the distribution of species in the Crimea" better than the horde of "cool" and "famous", which has degenerated only a small list. That is, to find a very cool one (by knowledge of fauna Of Crimea!) and very famous (knowledge of the fauna of the Crimea!), and not just with profile publications...