The Red Book and insects

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

Pages: 1 ...11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19... 41

08.12.2011 20:39, Victor Titov

Dmitrich, are you drunk? )))

Are you (I don't know what to call you now) sober?

Clones in forum terminology are nicknames that duplicate existing ones, my old nicknames have long been unavailable for recovery.

Narrowly take, as it is profitable for yourself. In my understanding, a clone on the network is an account of the same user. I registered once, under one nickname, and entered my real name in my profile. I have nothing to hide. And there's nothing to be afraid of here. You'll need to eat. Who are you really? "Roman"? I doubt it now. Reasonable.

Here many have such a story, some of you regularly put flowers )))

"Putting a flower", as you deigned to say, I express my agreement with the opinion of the participant, thank you for the useful information for me, etc.I, by the way, and you, I remember, "flowers" put. So what?

Okay, if we're talking about boo boo boo...

As for "don't wait", I wouldn't say " gop " until I jumped over

The particle " not " with verbs is written separately!

Alcohol, by the way, destroys mosk...

What is Mosk ?

If you were referring to the contents of the human skull, then this substance (organ?) in Russian, it is referred to as the MOZ of Moscow.

So you wouldn't write it like that, it's not cultural

This post was edited by Dmitrich - 08.12.2011 21: 35

Likes: 1

08.12.2011 21:51, Hierophis

I am always sober

, and there is always something to be afraid of and hide, there has never been complete openness, everyone hides something, starting from personal information and ending with causal places)))
So you're lying when you say you have nothing to hide.

And by the way, your understanding of the "clone" is kind of trashy, I didn't understand anything about it

By the way, today I heard on the radio that allegedly in Russia, in connection with the latest events regarding the elections, they want to "significantly limit anonymity on the Internet."
So here's the deal

I'm sorry, but this is my personal opinion, maybe it's not correct, but still the contents of the human skull, this is exactly mosk! The brain is something else, I think that humanity does not have

Likes: 4

Likes: 2

09.12.2011 12:27, Victor Titov

Dmitrich, khy-khy ..., stop "feeding the troll".

I apologize. Indeed, I fed him. Well, I'll throw the last cracker on the poor.

And by the way, your understanding of the "clone" is kind of trashy, I didn't understand anything about it

And you, as our fruitless communication has shown, don't understand a lot of things. Although, most likely, you pretend to be a true troll - you want to eat something.

I'm sorry, but this is my personal opinion, maybe it's not correct, but still the contents of the human skull, this is exactly mosk! The brain is something else, I think that humanity does not have it

Do not flatter yourself with hope - in the form in which you decided to present yourself here, you have nothing to do with humanity. And you are probably right - in the skull of the character on whose behalf you decided to communicate on the forum, there is no brain - only mosk. That's it, you're out of breadcrumbs. Switch to pasture.

This post was edited by Dmitrich - 12/10/2011 00: 45

Likes: 3

22.12.2011 9:44, Egorus

For okoem on ReEgorus

What do I need, then?

If it's just informational, then nothing new or interesting.
Almost all of these comments were made by the participants of this forum
in this topic. Well, a few new specific beetles, mostly on birds.

This is clearly not a guide to action.

There is only one alternative - lists instead of a book.
We had some other suggestions here.

Naturally, there are no answers when the situation will change, who will change
it and for SHO! (for money or for an idea???).

Oh, here's another one... Интересная фраза - "Занесено туди (у Червоний список МСОП (ИК)) багато
чого, i далеко не все знаходиться пiд загрозою."
It's very suggestive...

Likes: 2

27.01.2012 14:29, Penzyak

I read the article" Bird Hunting " in GEO for November 2011. The mood is disgusting-here are the bitches "Europoids" how many millions of songbirds are killed EVERY YEAR! The excuse that this is tradition and hunting excitement, as it is not rolled - I myself am a hunter, but shoot robins, starlings. finches and larks ... I don't want to and I can't.... Why the hell do we protect birds of prey if they are shot at for fun in Malta, and the same wasp is eaten in southern Europe, in Egypt they shoot so many waterfowl that they take pictures against the background of huge PILES of our wintering ducks, in Saudi Arabia sheikhs from jeeps finish off our last bustards... Oh my God, when will this all end?
You may ask and what does insects have to do with it!? Read the article and think about it...
http://www.geo.ru/archive/geo-164

Likes: 1

Likes: 5

Likes: 4

15.02.2012 9:55, Pleco

In fact, the answer is far from clear. If the species is really rare for non-natural reasons, then there are at least two options:
1. Individuals of a species, as a result of migration, enter a territory where they cannot complete their life cycle, as a result they die without giving offspring; or they manage to give offspring, which still dies due to unfavorable conditions. In this case, there is no point in protecting the species within the given territory.
2. The migrant manages to produce offspring that develop into imagos, migrating back to where, say, they can safely overwinter and then complete the life cycle. In this case, in my opinion, security is necessary.
Thus, knowledge of life cycles is important here.

15.02.2012 10:13, niyaz

And why do you need to include insects at all?

Because insects are living organisms. And like any living organism, they can completely disappear. It is clear that the main thing is to protect the biotope, but biotopes will constantly change, because people are always building something, changing something. But the presence of a cranobook species in the biotope will have legal grounds to leave this site alone, and choose, for example, another site that is not inhabited by rare organisms for construction.

The answer, in my opinion, is obvious.

How, from whom and for what purpose do you propose to protect the death's head hawk moth, for example, on the territory of Ukraine?

I find it difficult to answer this question, as I am not familiar in detail with the biology of this hawk moth.

In fact, the answer is far from clear. If the species is really rare for non-natural reasons, then there are at least two options:
1. Individuals of a species, as a result of migration, enter a territory where they cannot complete their life cycle, as a result they die without giving offspring; or they manage to give offspring, which still dies due to unfavorable conditions. In this case, there is no point in protecting the species within the given territory.
2. The migrant manages to produce offspring that develop into imagos, migrating back to where, say, they can safely overwinter and then complete the life cycle. In this case, in my opinion, security is necessary.
Thus, knowledge of life cycles is important here.

That's what I think is right. First you need to figure out what's what.
On the example of the same rare birds, it has long been proved that if they are not protected on their migration routes, but also in their nesting and breeding grounds, they will become extinct.

15.02.2012 10:51, Bad Den

It is clear that the main thing is to protect the biotope, but biotopes will constantly change, because people are always building something, changing something. But the presence of a cranobook species in the biotope will have legal grounds to leave this site alone, and choose, for example, another site that is not inhabited by rare organisms for construction.

This is a purely legal issue, in fact. We need to diversify the approach to the protection of K-and r-strategists in the first place, and therefore change the environmental legislation in the second place. But the trouble is that even people who understand this business like hell shy away from the possibility of somehow influencing this process ("I don't want to work for this government").

Likes: 2

15.02.2012 21:09, Лавр Большаков

niyaz
Permanent participant
Kazan, Tatarstan

today, 11: 13 am URL #585
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Because insects are living organisms. And like any living organism, they can completely disappear. It is clear that the main thing is to protect the biotope, but biotopes will constantly change, because people are always building something, changing something. But the presence of a cranobook species in the biotope will have legal grounds to leave this site alone, and choose, for example, another site that is not inhabited by rare organisms for construction.
------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - - - - -
This is absolutely correct. Among insects, it makes sense to protect mainly only local isolated populations by protecting biogeocenoses and establishing a specific nature management regime. Much has been written about this for a long time, but our society as a whole has not yet matured to protect biotopes. Here are some lawns with foreign flowers - they can be protected, although they have no significance for nature protection. But you still need to do normal QA, write on this topic, because this is invaluable material for future generations. Now we have very little data about what happened to the fauna 30-50 or more years ago
-------------

Likes: 9

16.02.2012 9:47, Лавр Большаков

niyaz
Regular participant
Kazan, Tatarstan
yesterday, 11: 13 URL #585
Because insects are living organisms. And like any living organism, they can completely disappear. It is clear that the main thing is to protect the biotope, but biotopes will constantly change, because people are always building something, changing something. But the presence of a cranobook species in the biotope will have legal grounds to leave this site alone, and choose, for example, another site that is not inhabited by rare organisms for construction.

(okoem @ 15.02.2012 10:45)
The answer, in my opinion, is obvious.

How, from whom and for what purpose do you propose to protect the death's head hawk moth, for example, on the territory of Ukraine?I

find it difficult to answer this question, as I am not familiar in detail with the biology of this hawk moth.
(Pleco @ 15.02.2012 10:55)
In fact, the answer is far from unambiguous. If the species is really rare for non-natural reasons, then there are at least two options:
1. Individuals of a species, as a result of migration, enter a territory where they cannot complete their life cycle, as a result they die without giving offspring; or they manage to give offspring, which still dies due to unfavorable conditions. In this case, there is no point in protecting the species within the given territory.
2. The migrant manages to produce offspring that develop into imagos, migrating back to where, say, they can safely overwinter and then complete the life cycle. In this case, in my opinion, security is necessary.
Thus, knowledge of life cycles is important here.
---"
That's what I think is right. First you need to figure out what's what.
On the example of the same rare birds, it has long been proved that if they are not protected on their migration routes, but also in their nesting and breeding grounds, they will become extinct.
--------------------------------------------------------
But it is absolutely impossible and pointless to protect the migrant homeless.
1) They (if from the south to the north), as a rule, freeze out in our latitudes-a dead head (pupa) already at a frost of the order of -5 degrees. Others cannot go into the winter diapause due to the southern type of photoperiodic reaction - as a result, the species tolerates frosts in the Siberian steppes (often below -40), but the range still does not go north.
2) In the south, they are eurytopic and common. Therefore, they migrate , which becomes crowded. In our country, they do not have permanent habitats that can be protected, and even if they return to the south, it does not matter for those populations.
3) Finally, birds have a constant migration pattern - the northern and southern regions are part of their living space. And in insects, this is unpredictable and random. Apparently, the only exception is the Danaida monarch, but this is in the tropics. We do not have such detours.

Likes: 6

26.02.2012 17:06, Лавр Большаков

If a species is rare in its homeland, then it usually cannot live outside of it, and after migrating, it commits suicide and kills its possible offspring - it will either freeze out or not go into the winter diapause and die "ingloriously". If the species begins to spread out of its range, it is provoked precisely by "crowding" in its homeland. There may be a small number of rare species that accidentally fly into other regions, but they rarely come to the attention of those who write the CC, and a serious author will not include them there. In the practice of collecting there are many dozens of very rare species, but whether they need to be protected, and how - no one knows. In any case, the CC of the Russian Federation and most regional CC are not assistants in this matter, rather on the contrary.

Likes: 1

Likes: 5

02.03.2012 13:35, А.Й.Элез

As for "constructiveness", I recall an old joke about a cop who responded to the advice " Think, think!" he answered briskly: "What the hell is there to think about, you need to shake it!.."

On the contrary, I would suggest extending the silence. Yes, in fact, almost no one has broken it yet, which is already characteristic: they are sad. But the author of the article understands the essence of the matter as well as many of us (the positive, though not galloping, dynamics of the entomological part of the CC in recent years is largely due to him), and it is possible that the author would feel better now if this article was not written by him, and, say, T. Penzyak... So we will not break into those positions from which the author of the article, although burdened with official duties, steadily moves to our topic from year to year. And Moscow wasn't built right away, so we'll wait.

And those who want to jump - jumpers in their hands. As part of this branch, no one bothers to express pro-kshnye judgments and no one goes with this in the branch about deer beetles ( http://molbiol.ru/forums/index.php?showtop...dpost&p=1300420 ) does not drive. There is also enough space for specific faunal questions related to the topic. It's probably just that enthusiasts should start not with collecting a lot of empirical information from an incomprehensible angle and with a meaningless aim, but from the beginning, with fundamental issues that have already been covered on this forum from a completely different point of view. That is, in order to finally develop a generally acceptable, logically perfect and applicable to reality the concept of " rarity "(insect!) and to prove the expediency of work on fixing "extreme" species in a certain place (after all, the latter would require, in addition to protecting biotopes, foraging, etc., the ability to control the weather, first of all, to stabilize the temperature regime). And at the same time, try to prove at least some connection between "rarity" and "extreme unreality"...

This post was edited by A. J. Elez - 02.03.2012 13: 57

Likes: 4

02.03.2012 19:12, Melittia

A priori considering the compilers of the CC as scientific workers, I am surprised at their incredible laziness. Gentlemen scientists, remember whether to include or not to include (it does not matter what and where!) it should only be done after the study is completed! Including this or that type in the CC. Have you done any relevant research? Or are these your purely empirical conclusions? And if they did, why didn't they publish it? By the way, I would very much like to see your research on the species "common
Apollo [Apollo] (Parnassius apollo), a species that is declining in numbers on the territory of the Russian Federation. Listed in the European Red List of the IUCN (2011): VU A1cde" - this is a quote from Sviridov, 2011:15. After reading this phrase, I began to think that the number of species on the territory of the Russian Federation is decreasing, and, according to the author, the territory of the Russian Federation itself! Who counted it in Siberia and the Altai? I think many people will support me - this is the most banal type of Parnassius east of the Urals! And why do we need the Red List of the IUCN, one of the non-governmental organizations, about the essence of which, I think, everyone knows perfectly well! Her lists are simple lists of species and nothing else! They are made up, for the most part, by "poor nature lovers" who even eat a chicken egg is like killing a dinosaur!
Here's another quote: "Zerynthia caucasica.
The only representative of the genus in the Russian fauna. It is endemic to the western Caucasus. The population is low. IUCN – VU A 1 ac, B 1 +2 ac. The question of the status of this
species, which is widespread in the Russian Federation, is unclear."Yes, everything is clear with this view! It's endemic! The number varies greatly, as with all butterflies. Ohryanivat it is necessary! But what if the range of the species is included in the need for Gazprom and Olimpikstroy to have this area? You won't even believe it, but it turned out to be ingeniously simple! We all know that any construction work requires environmental expertise. Great! Environmental expertise was sent to the construction area of South Stream and Olympic facilities in DECEMBER!! They concluded that there is nothing of natural interest in the construction area.
Further, referring to the IUCN, our conservationists should remember that the CC is a legal document, unlike all the IUCN CC lists taken together!

Likes: 3

Pages: 1 ...11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19... 41