The Red Book and insects

Community and Forum → Other questions. Insects topics → The Red Book and insects

Pages: 1 ...6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14... 41

Likes: 8

09.02.2010 1:50, mikee

And let me bring a fresh stream to the discussion, needles under the nails... Pure heresy...
If you look a little wider, it is easy to see that Nature in its blind selfishness has long surpassed all officials and insect destroyers, along with biotopes. Simply because the entire energy supply of human civilization is still only a fraction of a percent (I don't remember the exact figures) of the annual flow of solar energy coming to Earth. And natural disasters (glaciations, droughts,floods, eruptions, etc.) in historical retrospect repeatedly shook up both local biotopes and biocenoses, as well as the global biosphere. And this happens with enviable regularity, regardless of whether there is a QC or not... Awareness of this fact, finally, allowed us to take a sober look at the problem of "global warming", it remains just as soberly to assess the objective significance of CC and the struggle for nature conservation. And it turns out that all this is a storm in a glass of water, a clash of egoism of some private interests (I want a forest and butterflies) with others (I want my own cottage on this very spot).
Total: terramorphic capabilities of Nature are incomparable with the capabilities of human civilization. And the El Nino current on the other side of the globe affects the condition of a particular species (the same xantomelas) more than bulldozers. I exaggerate, of course, because it all depends on the size of the estimated territory, so I write "species", and not "local population"

I'm going to sleep before they eat

Likes: 1

09.02.2010 12:19, Penzyak

To Baryshev from Sanych:
Who is talking about what, and Alexander is talking about a new apartment (yes, I congratulate you on the housewarming party and the birth of my SON!!!). I've known Shurik since high school, when he was brought to our department by his school teacher, a thin, inquisitive boy... And do you remember Sasha, where the entomological fate did not throw us, how many adventures we experienced and how many new things we saw/found!? (The life of a naturalist in Penza is hard and unsightly . .. A joke) By the way, Alexander, as I recall, you are my co-author on a number of essays of the KK of the Penza region (Animals, 2005)!?? However, to be fair, I wrote them alone (about 50 essays). and my comrades provided only information. I wrote essays for 1.5 years, collected/analyzed them for many years, and my trips were mostly made at my own expense (to interesting entomological places) and all because of my love for entomology and native nature. I tried to tell about Penza rarities, educate the population, and inspire interest in entomology among the younger generation... I am not at all ashamed of what I wrote, I thought and still think that " all sorts of mothers are important - all sorts of mothers are needed!"
Let's cancel the Red Books - this will make it easier for nature!?? Everyone should ask themselves-What have I personally done that is USEFUL for the surrounding nature !? Pharisaism is incomparably easier... Catching insects and trading them seems to be fashionable nowadays... Then what???

I recently learned that in Penza some well-wishers from Nizhny Novgorod want to reanimate the Union of Nature Conservation, even want to publish their own magazine. So you came to our department, write about zoological rarities. They wrote it, they read it, and you know what they said!? "Not good - you need to write like all x....!!!" To which we naturally answered them in the same vein... I've NEVER BEEN such a "nature conservationist" and I DON'T WANT TO BE ONE!

You evil ones, I will leave you...

09.02.2010 18:11, александр барышев

Oleg, your message scares me-it's like saying goodbye to a dead comrade - I'm still alive. Thank you very much for your congratulations! I don't mind your work on creating essays for the CC, I agree - it's not a small job. But the example about polyxene remains a fact and not the only one. I see how our P. apollo in Nikonovo is guarded - a campsite there, riding on horses, people are dark, bottles are everywhere... it remains to lay out the asphalt tracks. Although he is in the CC. With such protection, there is also the last refuge in the area of A. laodice mallard socro. Just an address book is not a panacea, you need other methods. And the sale of insects has nothing to do with it! Both I and the others you're referring to - the apollo hasn't been caught here in several years - are all on the road. By the way, I don't deal in the insect trade, which you want me to get caught up in (which I don't have anything about), and I haven't ever done it, I like the exchange better. And I have never sold a single butterfly from our region - no one needs them for an exchange! In general, entomology is an expense item in my family budget, and certainly not an income. I'm also not ashamed of what I wrote, not even a little bit.

Likes: 2

09.02.2010 19:14, Victor Titov

Let's cancel the Red Books - this will make it easier for nature!??

More extremes! Who here has said a word about the need to cancel them?!

We are talking only about changing the approaches to their compilation (writing) and (most importantly!) use in practice.

Catching insects and trading them seems to be fashionable nowadays...

In certain circles (and far from the whole of humanity), this has been fashionable for, one might say, centuries, and (I hope) will continue to be so. Honestly, calluses on the tongue (fingers

), but I can't help but repeat: in 99,99999...(in the period) In some cases, it is impossible to put an insect species on the verge of extinction by trapping, and the ban on trapping and collecting is absurd.

You evil ones, I will leave you...

Why is it so?

I hope this is a joke of humor for you...

This post was edited by Dmitrich-09.02.2010 19: 14

Likes: 3

09.02.2010 20:01, Pavel Morozov

A small interlude.
It is enough to recall the Red Book hawk moth Clanis undulosa, about which it is written in the CC RF as follows: "The population has not been specifically studied, but, obviously, due to its local distribution in Russia, it is very low and subject to significant fluctuations. In some years, it is relatively common in its habitat, when 8-12 butterflies fly to the light during the night. More often, only single individuals are recorded during the entire summer period. Forest fires are the most dangerous for the life of the species, as rare-coniferous oak forests in the south. Primorye is particularly affected by frequent autumn-spring fires, which not only burn out the forest floor, where the wintering pupae of the wavy clanis hide, but also kill the entire undergrowth, including shrubby and herbaceous plants of the genus Lespedeza - potential food plants for caterpillars of this species."

Timidly-timidly written about 8-12 individuals. Spring fires are probably the most objective fact. I will say that even in the crowded and sometimes dirty Andreevka, this hawk moth comes across during the day, often sitting on the wall of a store near a lamp. A forage plant grows everywhere you look, butterflies actively and quite abundantly fly to the light. I'm not afraid to call Klanis the most popular hawk moth of the Khasansky district. Well, what are the reasons for entering and assigning as much as category I? If only the fact that the species lives on the edge of our range is also absurd. The situation with the second KK hawk moth, Sphecodina caudata, is also controversial. Forage plant Amur grapes - also common. Adult years are not the most popular time for entomologists in the European part-late spring-early summer. In 2006, I almost accidentally found a caterpillar, which, however, died. But the caterpillar was found almost near the garbage dump.
Here is another reason for the introduction - living on the edge of the range. Both of these species are widely distributed in Asia, especially clanis.

Likes: 1

11.02.2010 10:06, Dmitry Vlasov

I will unsubscribe about marsh species in the Cultural Center of the Yaroslavl region. Marsh mace was included as an INDICATOR species, They are very stenotopic, and they are often easier to detect than the rarer, but more secretive or difficult to recognize ones. And they made it to the CC so that there would be no reason to withdraw swamps from protected areas for peat development, drainage, etc. Anthrenus knows what I mean... The number of points by type and category will be left to the conscience of the author - a desk scientist...
As for the Batkovsky swamp - I am happy for the Muscovites who got there and found Oeneis jutta, but to our great regret (Yaroslavl entomologists) - there are not so many collectors and professionals in the region as in Moscow. We can all be counted on the fingers of ONE hand (without dividing into beetles and butterflies) and all explore the area in their free time from their main work... Yes, and the age of all over 40... Here that a closer examination would have time... Despite two higher education institutions with biofacts, young enthusiasts are not visible not only on the horizon, but also far beyond it...

Likes: 6

11.02.2010 11:12, А.Й.Элез

My colleague, I fully share your sadness: both about the number of Yaroslavl entomologists and the removal of swamps from protected areas. But in a situation where they can even spit on the status of protected areas for the sake of economic exploitation of the swamp, how much will give an extra indication of the presence of some kind of palaeno there? Spitting on the head, will they respect a single hair? I don't know, I don't know...

As for the correlation between science and expediency, even here you know better, I'm afraid to judge, but statistically in most cases I noticed that it is precisely expediency that serves the maximum scientific value. Personally, I would not want to lie for the sake of expediency in any situation (except for social disasters). Is it easy, for example, without blushing, for the sake of protecting the biotope, to tell some official that the Loch Ness monster is found in this swamp, or for the sake of protecting the forest edge from development, to point out a cabbage that is very noticeable to the official and say that only one and a half populations of this good man remain in the region?..

But the opportunities and results are very simple to relate: If you don't have enough money, don't build a dacha. If you don't want it, don't torment it. If you don't have the talent to write poetry, no one will blame you, but then please don't clog up the printed pages with your nonsense, because that's exactly what they will blame you for. CC, in my opinion, should be created after accumulating and understanding a certain amount of data, and not when, look, all the neighbors already have a CC.

I am, in fact, only talking about the specific implementation of the CC, and my (and not only my) dissatisfaction concerns the articles in its text, and not the work of Yaroslavl entomologists in general; and I fully understand the complexity of the situation – both in terms of personnel, ecology, and much more. It is a pity that other writers of KK would not like to join us wholeheartedly: what is worth visiting sometimes, if not peatlands, then our forum? and to know (and in the absence of information – once again ask someone specifically) what is being done, when and at what points? After all, adding (to the already given points) even Batkovsky alone, believe me, is enough to throw out the entire swamp linden tree from that CC. Such disregard for our data offends us, writers live a separate life and often spit on our information, the most important document is written from a fool, so why are we (I'm still only talking about pure amateurs like me) wandering around these swamps, if all this is not given up to anyone? Just for the sake of sadism, popridavlivat fauna?

This post was edited by A. J. Elez - 02/23/2010 04: 16

Likes: 4

Likes: 2

Likes: 1

11.02.2010 13:17, Victor Titov

CC, in my opinion, should be created after accumulating and understanding a certain amount of data, and not when, look, all the neighbors already have a CC.

Unfortunately, the CC for officials is not a document on the basis of which it is necessary to build environmental activities in the region, but, in the vast majority of cases, only a matter of status, prestige, a means to satisfy their, often momentary, ambitions. From afar KK, there is it - and this is almost all. If they need (want) to drain the swamp, "ennoble" the area of the forest, cutting down all the old trees, give a lawn near the river under the protection of an elite cottage village, nothing will stop them, especially the fact that some Red Book beetles live in these territories. In order for the CC to work, we need political will at the very top of our state. But it doesn't exist. It's all talk. What kind of beetles-butterflies there are-everyone remembers the story of the helicopter attack on mountain sheep. And if not for the accident, no one would have known about the criminal "royal hunt". It's bitter...

This post was edited by Dmitrich - 11.02.2010 13: 17

Likes: 8

11.02.2010 22:21, А.Й.Элез

Unfortunately, the CC for officials is not a document on the basis of which it is necessary to build environmental activities in the region, but, in the vast majority of cases, only a matter of status, prestige, a means to satisfy their, often momentary, ambitions. From afar KK, there is it - and this is almost all. If they need (want) to drain the swamp, "ennoble" the area of the forest, cutting down all the old trees, give a lawn near the river under the protection of an elite cottage village, nothing will stop them, especially the fact that some Red Book beetles live in these territories.

A thousand times true. But with all this, if officials do not really consider the CC as the basis for environmental protection, it is unlikely that entomologists themselves should turn this very CC into an additional basis for destroying nature-either by reducing all animals worthy of protection to one and a half points per region, or by subjectively disorienting environmental activities. In the end, it is not the drainage and development officials who will be the first to read the CC at the post, but environmentalists and nature conservationists. All other things being equal, it is better to give them no bullshit in their hands...

Likes: 1

Likes: 2

11.02.2010 23:00, А.Й.Элез

Eh. I'm not talking about nerds. And not about verbal language, but about a much more lucid and historically proven way to set the brains of officials (and not only them)... And the proverb about the fish head is very ambiguous, it is often used to justify their fin or tail inactivity. Yes, this floating organism rots from the head, but it rots to the extent that – and as long as – the fins agree to tolerate this rot.

And it is better to check the effectiveness of the language of "botany" against the opposite: do not write the truth, but write in the name of science that there are only five points left in the region with marsh entomofauna that deserves protection, and you will immediately see that your scribbling will be very useful to officials when destroying all other swamps in the region. Officials only do not hear the truth, and they can even use the nonsense that is profitable for them. Everything is more profitable than organizing sales examinations and approvals for money (they organize them for some reason before each capture, so they don't go on a very smooth road). So what the hell are we giving them an extra treat?.. They say that they don't understand our language anyway, they won't stop putting things on our heads anyway, so let's help them with this in our own way?!.

Likes: 1

Likes: 2

16.02.2010 22:41, А.Й.Элез

[Response to a post by T. Penzyak, later deleted, about disagreeing with the subtitle of the topic]
And for many others, the subtitle is fundamental. It is from this point of view that we have suffered on this topic. Those who think otherwise are a minority here, because such people are usually focused not on the forum at all, but on fabricating fantastic articles for the next CC. They are not up to our conversations on the forums, they know their business very well. And we, after their next cooking, only subtitled nerves and calm down.

At the same time, the positive aspects of the CC in this topic are also indicated and discussed, the subtitle has not yet restricted anyone in expressing their own point of view. I think the only thing that its visitors could ask from each writer is to check first before expressing their ideas whether they have already been expressed earlier in this thread and whether they have already (perhaps even repeatedly) been evidently refuted.

This post was edited by A. J. Elez - 02/28/2010 01: 36

Likes: 4

Likes: 1

26.02.2010 14:59, Penzyak

Dear colleagues,
The Red Data Book of the Russian Federation (Animals, 2001) shows a rather modest species composition of insects for the territory of the European part of Russia! For example, out of 33 species of butterflies, only 4 species live in the European part of the Russian Federation!? Whereas in the CC of the USSR (Zhivotniye, 1984), this gap was less noticeable, although it also included lepidoptera from the former Soviet republics... In " Annotated list of taxa that need the main attention..."(Appendix 3 to the CC RF 2001) included 53 species of lepidoptera, in which among the really rare species, one can also see widespread ones, for example, Papilio machaon L.

So what types of insects, in your opinion, should be on the pages of the new edition of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation?

Likes: 1

Likes: 2

Likes: 1

Likes: 5

27.02.2010 19:25, А.Й.Элез

How persistently our forum is bred on this topic. Rename the old branch (remove the word "nonsense"in the subtitle) - we tried, but failed, because that name perfectly reflects the content of the topic and almost the general position of the participants, so you can't beat us, we will create a new one without soap. If not by washing, then by rolling. Maybe we'll pick up something for our own future articles in the CC... it's a "promising"business.

The topic on the subject repeats the existing one (a little, however, broader). We persistently throw up empty barrels so that we can roll them here. But the presence of individual individuals who are dissatisfied with just the subtitle of a similar branch is not yet a reason for sticking out an already established branch of a new one on the same subject. In addition, in this thread, the initiator will most likely receive from us only those formulations that are unlikely to be decently used when writing articles for the CC, and will not achieve their goal. Personally, even if there are potential recommendations (for certain types), I do not intend to throw them out here for our esteemed colleague, because I feel that this is not the case to even embark on a good enterprise with all sincerity.

Therefore, I appeal to the moderator (I hope my colleagues will support it): please move all the material of this absolutely inflated and superfluous topic to the long-established topic " The Red Book and insects (what are the origins of this nonsense)", and cover this stillborn topic. So that some do not think that they are the most cunning here and can go around the entire forum on a crooked mare.

Likes: 7

01.03.2010 13:58, Penzyak

Yes, it's sad to read all this... With particular bewilderment, I read the last message in which I am suspected of having - "some of my benefits from this topic!?" For some reason, some individuals stubbornly believe that they are "trying to breed" and "maybe we'll get something for future articles of our own ..." Sorry, I didn't do such garbage, I don't do it and I won't do it while I'm in my right mind and sound memory. I have quite enough materials of my own and I don't suffer from megalomania to qualify for writing essays on the most important ones in the new edition of the CC RF. And no matter how much the respected audience (or rather part of it) treats negatively the very idea of the Red Book and insects in it, thank God that absolutely nothing depends on them (who signed the last appeal).
The Red Book was, is, and will continue to be - no matter how individuals try to discredit it, since our inevitably changing world (unfortunately) needs it. And if my scientific opponents so persistently do not understand this, then I have no particular desire to argue with them and spend my time on it. Unfortunately, we will probably only be judged by time... And if an unsophisticated reader asks me - why do some researchers perceive CC topics (and insects in it)? as " nonsense...", I put forward a counter question - What exactly did THEY do to preserve the nature around us and the entomofauna in it (as an inseparable component of it)!? Or are they only able to draw from nature to meet some of their private needs!? Flooding, of course, is much easier and more epic - we see this in modern reality all the time, alas.
Therefore, I appeal to the highly respected moderator: please, if the sane audience of the forum does not support me, then I do not want to be like Don Quixote (and even on the "crooked mare") struggling with windmills...

This post was edited by Penzyak - 01.03.2010 14: 28

01.03.2010 15:06, Victor Titov

And no matter how much the respected audience (or rather part of it) treats negatively the very idea of the Red Book and insects in it, thank God that absolutely nothing depends on them (who signed the last appeal).

It feels like you are speaking to most of the participants in this topic in different languages. Or you just pretend you don't understand. Yes, who here "has a negative attitude to the very idea of the Red Book"?! For the last time: absolutely fair (at least in my opinion) criticism is only the principles and approaches of forming Red Book lists of insects and writing essays on insects in the CC.

The Red Book was, is, and will continue to be - no matter how individuals try to discredit it, since our inevitably changing world (unfortunately) needs it.

The idea of the Red Book is not denigrated by forum participants who try to reach out to the mind and conscience of some CC compilers, but by these CC compilers who think about anything but the practical benefits of their "creation".

..why do some researchers perceive CC topics (and insects in them)? like " nonsense...",

First of all, it is not the KK theme as a whole, but only the insects in it (in the form in which they are now "put"there. Secondly, please read the topic " The Red Book and insects. What are the origins of this delusion?" I hope that sooner or later you will understand.

Likes: 3

Pages: 1 ...6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14... 41