The Red Book and insects

To Dracus
About field events before writing the CC, this is a separate "song" For example, when we wrote the CC of the Yaroslavl region, we were told-write on existing materials, there is no money for field trips. And then (someday) you will conduct monitoring. I think the situation is similar with CC and other areas.
Well, plus the competence of the authors of essays. This topic has already been "littered" in many topics.
As for the protection of vulnerable habitats - if a legal document is issued (i.e., a resolution is adopted, fines are prescribed, etc.), then theoretically, when a population of a Red book animal or plant is found, a protected area should be established with the necessary protection measures. But this is only theoretical...

Insects in general are characterized by very significant natural fluctuations in their abundance. This, by the way, is the basis for many of the stupidities of the Red Books. They noted that a certain species has become less common for several years - they conclude that the insect is dying out, and it is urgently necessary to protect it.
In a good way, you need to:
1. A network of points throughout the region (for which the Red List is maintained), where constant monitoring is carried out.
2. Environmental expertise when a species is included in the list of protected areas. In other words, threat analysis: whether it is local, how vulnerable it is to anthropogenic impact (the insect itself, the forage plant, or the entire biocenosis with which it is rigidly connected).
That is, we need to work seriously and on a permanent basis, without campaigning.

Wild insects are always rare, by the way. Should rarity then be considered an absolute criterion for entering in the CC? About population fluctuations-I agree. About the rest-you need money, and big ones. In our conditions, given that the CC is a state document, no matter how much money is given, everything is "organized". But they don't always give you enough money. The output is "key" specialists in groups plus big money. Almost utopia.

And so - on a pin.

That's where he belongs.
This is what red books are for, to increase the value of fees.

About another Red Book butterfly.
There is such a Wavy clanis, one of our largest hawkmoth. We constantly live only in the Khasansky district of Primorsky Krai, and even then, mainly in the coastal zone. It is widely distributed in east and southeast Asia and forms several subspecies. The Red Data Book says about it that "there is a tendency to reduce the number." We ourselves just arrived from Andreevka (just in the Khasansky district). Of all the local hawkmoth (and we came across 11 species), it is the most numerous there.
That's how small it is, you know.
However, its uniqueness for our entomofauna is indisputable.
One of the reasons for the "small number" may be that researchers " collect in the wrong place." Such a story came out with the famous autocrator (Parnassius autocrator). It turns out that you need to know the places.

And where did you find a lot of Avtokrators (within the USSR)?

If I'm not lying, then Avinov was caught in 1911 somewhere on the Vanch ridge of the Western Pamirs. For a long time it was considered a subspecies of P. charltonius. Only 20 years later, another population was found in Afghanistan and isolated as an independent species.
Already in the second half of the 20th century, the autocrator was found on the Vanch, Rushan and North Alichur ranges of the western Pamirs. They caught it mainly at an altitude of 3200-3500 m. In my opinion, even at a lower altitude, someone then caught it.
As L. V. Kaabak writes about it, at present (I quote) " it is found on the Vanchsky, Rushansky, Muzkol and Severo-Alichursky ridges near Lake Sarez. It is found at an altitude of about 3500-4500 m above sea level. Favorite places are rocks and very steep rock slopes. Only there are common tufts - plants that feed on autocrats, forming rare and isolated populations with a fairly high number of individuals in a small area."
I will add that these crested birds are Corydalis fimbrillifera and C. onobrychis (Kreuzberg, 1984) (data from the book "butterflies of Russia and adjacent territories ed by V. Tuzov.
I've also heard that there's an autocrator flying around the northern slopes.
It seems that you just need to know the places.

This post was edited by Morozzz-02.08.2006 15: 31

Maybe I'll say nonsense, but here is the opinion formed after the words of a friend who told me how to catch an avtokrator:
Perhaps they fly in large numbers, but in places that are not accessible to humans, and here the entomologist is sitting with his legs hanging over a cliff, on a mountain of 3500 meters and waiting for some avtokrator to take off or not, take off - there will be an opportunity to understand if you do not fly into the abyss (and according to many people flew away).
As with morphiids-they probably fly enough, but they fly high, which hunters catch on high structures, from which they often break.

Yes, and not always enough knowledge of places - in one year you come to the place, catch enough, and the next nothing (I have this with pandora-the year before last with a friend about 30 pieces caught, though almost all terribly shabby. Last year and this year I didn't see any! Although in other places I saw 1-2 things). And there is another case-a friend went to catch butterflies in one place for many years, caught many good species, but never once, and this year I accidentally found first 1, and then several more Maculinea arion, as it would seem - where they were before!

That's right, RippeR, do you think we caught a bunch of Papilio maackii in Primorye? We saw two, and that's all.
On rocky scree in the mountains of Central Asia, you have to catch like this: the catcher goes along the ridge ridge, sees, for example, P. delphius flying a little lower, jumps after him, trying to catch, runs down the steep scree for 100 meters, and back.
In Primorye, for example, they tried to catch local pigeon marshmallows. They fly mostly high above the very crowns of oaks and in large numbers, on flowers (sorbariums) they feed reluctantly. It's hard to catch. If we go again, I'll get a net with a five-meter holder and a one-meter diameter hoop.
If you had more time and desire, we would look for the eggs of these marshmallows.

I wonder what kind of nonsense in Red Data Book of the Chelyabinsk region-insects?
And who do you mean, Andrey, by a beetle that is not present in the South Ural fauna? If ribbed ground beetle then such a statement is possible after peropisaniya copies from the Urals.

Small amendments to the photo album of the Red Book of the Chelyabinsk region:
http://www.redbook.ru/foto/albums/1/cicada.jpg
"it's not a Cicadetta montana, but a larger and more interesting species.
http://www.redbook.ru/foto/albums/1/normal_gera.jpg
- Callimorpha dominula, not quadripunctaria
http://www.redbook.ru/foto/albums/1/normal_Limenitis.jpg
not Apatura iris, but Limenitis populi

Thank you so much. And then the entomologist's hands do not reach to look.
And the question is about this animal can be - http://www.redbook.ru/foto/albums/4/_DSC0250.jpg (http://www.redbook.ru/foto/displayimage.php?album=9&pos=11)

Aphantopus hyperanthus - Black-brown eye. Mass view....

Thank you for the massive growth,
just last July razova observed them at least 1000

[ I wonder what nonsense is in the Red Book of the Chelyabinsk region-insects

Yes at least a point:Ants of the genus Formica

[ What's wrong with it?) A completely adequate explanation, in my opinion, is given by the author of this kind.


And in my opinion, it's pretty stupid - not everyone can tell the difference, so we'll put everything in the Red Book. 99 percent of my friends do not distinguish any rare tahina from the usual housefly. What now - to protect the housefly?
In addition, I have very little idea how to cause real damage to at least one formica nest and from whom they need to be protected.

I agree, this is nonsense. In my opinion, the only real damage to a large formica nest can be done if you pour gasoline on it and set it on fire. In recent years, I have become interested in myrmecophila beetles and have destroyed many anthills of this genus. I can say that a third of the anthill that I demolished appears back in its original form in less than a week. So I don't see any damage to them at all. On the contrary, the number of anthills of the genus Formica has been increasing in the forests of central Russia in recent years, in my opinion, everywhere.

In general, it is not individual anthills or species that need to be protected, but communities and biotopes. This is so by the way.
And about the surplus of Red book species-completely lied, the authors always got excited with bumblebees, now with ants the same song.

This post was edited by scarabee - 13.03.2007 10: 47

In the new edition of the Krasnodar Territory
Agricultural Committee, the plavuntsy Deronectes latus, Platambus lunulatus, Hydaticus grammicus
and the water lover Megasternum obscurum are listed
.

How to get a new Red Book of the Krasnodar krai

The Red Book of the Krasnodar Territory has not yet been published, there is only an officially approved list of species!

Red Data Book of the city of Moscow: Lepidoptera of various species, 17 species
Blackthorn lemonia, Sivers's crested, scabiose bumblebee, honeysuckle bumblebee, Proserpine, Lady bear, Silver cowl, Lemon Xanthia, False Nicteola, Rinsed Enargia, unanimous Apamea, Evening Oligia, Small red Order ribbon, Poplar Order ribbon, Order ribbon blue, Ordenskaya street the ribbon is crimson, the Order ribbon is pink.
Krasnaya kniga goroda Moskvy [Red Book of the City of Moscow]. Moscow: Govt. Sviridov A.V. 2001 P. 397, 399-414, 419-425.

Krasnaya kniga goroda Moskvy [Red Book of the City of Moscow]. Moscow: Govt. Sviridov A.V. 2001: 397, 399-414, 419-425.

Of course, of course. Read. Very funny book. Among the bees, they decided to protect Andrena haemorrhoa and Andrena hattorfiana. Species for Moscow are as "rare" as, say, the house sparrow and the gray crow. It can be seen that the drafters used the allocated money and then write an explicit bodyguard. At least they would read books...

And here, it seems, is the preparation of a list of invertebrates for the new edition of the CC of the Moscow region:
http://www.geogr.msu.ru/rb/docs/bespozvonochnye.pdf

At least the migrant yolks were removed. And xanthomelas.

I have a question: who is the red book written for?

It seems to me that for (and by order of) officials.

It seems to me that for (and by order of) officials.

Then (in my opinion) the topic is exhausted. We are not officials, so why should we discuss their waste paper?

Then (in my opinion) the topic is exhausted. We are not officials, so why should we discuss their waste paper?

I don't agree: these are after all legal documents written for us as well.

I don't agree: After all, these are legal documents written for us as well.

That's right, if this is a legal document (as it should be, in my opinion), then the CC should also include hard-to-identify species, and the book itself should be designed for specialists (experts) who can confirm the presence of a rare CC species in a particular territory (which, as a result, must be protected or protected by law). by law). Training, = > should be carried out according to a single methodology (criteria of the Quality Control System) and by professionals, not teachers.
And as a result, we have a popular science book, which (paper version) is not affordable for kids-naturalists. It may have legal force, but it is aimed at preserving the population of species (although not always, but, however).

As a result, pop remains pop.
This was stated a couple of messages ago.

By the way, the ideal version of the CC idea is about what is done by anti-fogs and plant protection. A network of hospitals with people who only do this.

Adamov, sometimes high-quality pop music makes a very favorable impression.

I personally almost became a participant in the compilation of such a CC. The boss runs in.
- We urgently need a list of rare leaf beetles of the Altai Territory!
- Mmm, well, three years of work, expeditions, monitoring...
- No, we need tomorrow, but better today...
- ???
- Well, look in the identifier, I only need 20 types, otherwise I have to report for the grant urgently...
"I'm sorry, I said, I'll pass."..

I've been out of favor ever since.

This is a joke not only with insects, but with all animals. In Estonia, we have taken it upon ourselves to protect beavers. Before that, they were already ordinary, and after they were taken under protection, problems began-the beavers became emboldened, ran to eat border posts, and telegraph posts as well)) small soraychiki near reservoirs, they did not want the same. The fact is that so far no one has crossed them out of the red list. Beavers eat everything they see-and harm the beaver who ruined your property - you are also to blame. No, I'm certainly for a careful attitude to nature, but if some beaver my soray gnawed, I would be mildly angry at the animal))
And the insects in the CC also make me cheaper! But it's still up to you to see. Some types of which are allowed in Estonia in bulk, I practically did not get up anywhere in Austria or Italy.... And the CC for the European Union is the same, and for Estonia and for the same Italy, so this is bullshit. Namely, one mnemosyne butterfly is included in the Estonian CC, but at least it is really rare in our country....

Probably, this topic has been closed for a long time, but I can't help but correct my Baltic colleague. It was completely wrong to say that all EU countries have a single list of protected species. Each country has local lists with different degrees of protection. We must not forget about international directives and conventions (which, apparently, the dabb had in mind). See my esse on the coleoprerologists ' website for information on how species protection works in Latvia, http://www.zin.ru/animalia/coleoptera/rus/red_latv.htm As far as I know, Estonia has a system that is absolutely similar to Latvia's, i.e. it has species that are common to all EU countries (i.e. the Berne Convention and the Council of Europe Directive) and its own local - in the Latvian case - species listed as protected by the Cabinet of Ministers. Forests have their own list of indicator species of valuable forest biotopes (and based on the presence of one or more species in the forest, this forest area is assigned various categories of forest use - from complete prohibition to full permission). And the Red Book as such does NOT have a legal basis in our country. It simply includes species to inform the public about general problems of nature protection.

By no means, it's too early to close this topic. At our institute, the Sverdlovsk Region CC is already maturing. How it will differ from the CC of the Middle Urals, I don't know. I think nothing! Just do not miss this opportunity for colleagues to earn extra money and add to the list of publications. The notorious PRND is now being increased by everyone...

The main thing is to understand that in the hands of a specialist, the list of protected species is the basis for preserving the BIOTOPE! And officials (they are the same everywhere) need a list of species, and it is precisely on the basis of the location of certain species on the territory that a specific biotope can be preserved (for example, to create a reserve or micro-reserve). The "meaning" of protecting a particular species, of course, is already clear to everyone, i.e. it does not exist. But the biotope, as a habitat for many interesting species, is the biotope that needs to be protected. Through lists and red books.

I don't see much point in CC, except for collectors and specialists.
And as for the officials, well, they created a nature reserve or micro-reserve, and then "state importance" and there is neither a nature reserve nor a nature reserve.
Here in Sochi, I heard that specially protected natural areas are allocated for Olympic projects, but I suspect that most of these objects have nothing to do with the Olympics.

I asked a friend here;
- How do you feel about CC?
"I feel sorry for her," he says.
- why?
- Yes, soon it will be so thick that no one will be able to lift it.

K voprosu o KK, zapovednikakh, etc. - conversations about PTZ in the topic Flood pro Epilakha

There is a lot of criticism of the CC. And have there been any cases when alternative CC's (which, of course, do not have the official, i.e. legal, status of CC's) were issued by specialists as "they consider it correct"? Such books that met the requirements of the available critical works.

- Maybe a little bit on the wrong topic..., - but I considered the Red Book of the Stavropol Territory, of course.; - there the printers mixed up the names with photos! - In my opinion, this is nonsense squared!!!