The Red Book and insects

... the fecundity of the same apollo, which in captivity can not even be forced to mate...

that's not a problem=)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pKiz0Xwdm3g
and apollo is the same garbage, just there is no video
and rushes like a cute one
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q9y2-k4-ZIY

This post was edited by t00m - 29.11.2017 16: 31

that's not a problem=)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pKiz0Xwdm3g
and apollo is the same garbage, just there is no video
and rushes like a cute one
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q9y2-k4-ZIY

The swallowtail. And zhuzhlo so already in an unfilled stain harit each other in four bows. But I wasn't talking about sudden captivity for newly captured individuals. Although it is very difficult to get even a natural apollo to mate in captivity and at the same time wait for the actual fertilization of eggs, especially in a small cage. If you have more optimistic specific information on apollo, I would be grateful. I have personal information that someone turned out with apollo (and then, perhaps, not with the output ones, but again with the natural ones - which, I believe, are the swallowtails in your video) exactly the version that you presented with the swallowtail, but a number of attempts to check this gave a negative result Later, I found out what kind of lyad these apollos (and specifically males) lacked - and not just the clear sun, without which the libido of male apollos is at zero - but I was not authorized to divulge this (although this detail makes the task easier, but not much). Therefore, anyone who needs fertilized apollo eggs takes them only from naturally fertilized females. Here we have repeatedly recalled how apollo was once reintroduced to the PTZ (where, however, it took root only for a few years, during which it steadily reduced its number): they took 450 (it seems) caterpillars of the 3rd age, obtained from eggs from females from the Vladimir and Kaluga regions. I myself have received eggs from fertilized apollo females at home more than once (of course, from defective ones) in any required quantity, the caterpillar comes out without problems, eats, pupates, imagos are hatched, and if a few simple rules are followed, the yield is brought to one hundred percent. You can at least spread it all over Russia; but, alas, where it did not reach itself or where it was, but died out, it will most likely not be able to take root (except in those places where you can artificially get five minutes ahead of the expected spontaneous settlement, if your hands are so itchy and the newspapermen are not around). I once posted photos of individuals hatching in an apartment on the forum (I think in reports for Moscow and the Moscow Region). I answered here; but in general, there is a separate topic on Parnassius.

in order not to offtopit, further along the parnassus in the personal account.

Almost in the subject. I received the following message from Dmitry Telnov::

Colleagues,
a response is being prepared - a petition in response to the publication of Pyron (Pyron) "We don't need to save endangered species. Extinction is part of evolution", available at https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/we-d...m=.6bb63707ee63
I suggest that you and other colleagues sign up as authors of the response open letter-petition (in the appendix). You can add signatures here: http://www.protect-biodiversity.com/
Comments on "why Piron is not quite right" can be found here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-lAV0m3...A-WjkxxFPE/edit
Send it to other colleagues as well!

In my opinion, it is worth participating in

See how you are not forced to disappear, smart
guys Evolution-then it concerns everyone
And its trends are not the same as just now

Funny reviews of the Red Books of Bashkortostan

VALUEV V. A. REVIEW OF V. N. OLSHVANG'S ESSAYS IN THE RED BOOK OF THE REPUBLIC OF BASHKORTOSTAN (2014) EDITED BY B. M. CHICHKOV


 ________.pdf

size: 329.93 k
number of downloads: 347








ZAGRIEV I. M. REVIEW OF P. Y. GORBUNOV'S ESSAYS "THE ORDER OF LEPIDOPTERA" IN THE RED BOOK OF THE REPUBLIC OF BASHKORTOSTAN (2014) (EDITOR-IN-CHIEF B. M. CHICHKOV)


 _____________________.pdf

size: 528.83 k
number of downloads: 436

Funny reviews of the Red Books of Bashkortostan

rather sad

Funny reviews of the Red Books of Bashkortostan

The situation is neither funny nor sad, the most common one.
You were admiring the book just now, and it's the same thing all the time...

The situation is neither funny nor sad, the most common one.
You were admiring the book just now, and it's the same thing all the time...

Yes, but I admired the exterior first of all, having received the book in my hands. To analyze the interior, you need at least time, and not a small one.

Reviewers of Bashkir CC are tormented by the toad that they were not trusted with CC. But they are not quite right. On the one hand, yes, the CC should reflect up-to-date data. On the other hand, the state does not sponsor the collection of this data in any way. And what did the reviewers themselves do to learn about the fauna of Bashkiria? This is still unclear.

[quote=guk,....You were admiring the book just now, and it's the same thing all the time...[/quote]
I'm not really into the topic, but my butterfly friends don't see any progress there compared to the first publications of 10 or more years ago. And what is especially strange. Swing at the "Volga-Ural region" - and completely ignore the huge array of works on this very "region". Where are Penza, Tatarstan, Mordovia, Nizhny Novgorod, Maria, Udmurtia? After all, all this is also "Volga-Ural".

I'm not really into the topic, but my butterfly friends don't see any progress there compared to the first publications of 10 or more years ago. And what is especially strange. Swing at the "Volga-Ural region" - and completely ignore the huge array of works on this very "region". Where are Penza, Tatarstan, Mordovia, Nizhny Novgorod, Maria, Udmurtia? After all, all this is also "Volga-Ural".

Were there any complaints about these publications from 10 years ago? I think there were 15 publications in total.
Come on Penza, Tatarstan... for Bashkiria, about 80 species of scoops missed, and for Orenburg - all 120. Nupponen, Fibiger, Ahola, etc., who have studied these regions, to put it mildly, will not be happy.

This post was edited by niyaz - 17.01.2018 23: 35

I'm not really into the topic, but my butterfly friends don't see any progress there compared to the first publications of 10 or more years ago. And what is especially strange. Swing at the "Volga-Ural region" - and completely ignore the huge array of works on this very "region". Where are Penza, Tatarstan, Mordovia, Nizhny Novgorod, Maria, Udmurtia? After all, all this is also "Volga-Ural".

I don't quite understand what is meant by "progress".
It is depressing that the indication of many species for the Volgograd region was taken from no one knows where, but all attempts to contact Vasily Vasilyevich were, alas, unsuccessful.

In fact, Evermesan wrote the fauna of lepidoptera in the interfluve-that is, Between the Volga and the Urals... It is not clear only whether interesting finds of butterflies were taken into account in the territories beyond the Volga (in the regions located on the Volga)???
Again, and here the Penza, Nizhny Novgorod region, Rep. Mordovia and Mari-El - they do not fall under the study area in any way!!
Anikin V. V. is always in touch when in Saratov-but, he travels a lot around the Russian Federation and the world... Again, they would write comments and suggestions to Zolotukhin and Sachkov - they are quite adequate and competent entomologists.
And now, after the book is published, write additions and reviews - that's why it will move forward! And the book is just how to say "overlap" on the previous "brickwork" where bricks are articles on lepidoptera in the region under consideration.

This post was edited by Penzyak - 22.01.2018 11: 44

Penzyak, if you write the fauna only on the routes of Eversman, then you need to title it that way, and not talk about the "Volga-Ural". By the way, there are references to other regions, including Penza, but some of them are strangely selective. As I know, there are many more important and even unique finds for the Volga region in your Penza region than the authors mentioned. And there is nothing to say about the others.

Red Data Book of the Ivanovo region. Animals (2017)
http://eco.ivanovoobl.ru/deyatelnost/krasn...ovskoj-oblasti/
True, the file is huge 400 M There is also the first edition (2007), if anyone needs it for comparison...

This post was edited by Elizar - 23.01.2018 15: 02

: Тваринний світ Запорізької області у Червоній книзі України. Melitopol region: dovidnikove vidannya ([i]Animal world of Zaporizhia region in the Red Data Book of Ukraine. Melitopol region: reference publication"Interesting literature")

Pages of the Red Book of Ukraine 1 to 1 with maps and photos (with a small number of author's photos), with an additional section: The species ' camp in the Zaporizky region (Melitopol region) (The state of the species in the Zaporozhye region (Melitopol region)), The main sources of information (it is not clear how they were formed, somewhere taken for Ukraine as a whole, where-something for the region (very selectively, somewhere both) and a mandatory author-compiler.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1V5Lgq21ha...bFVZRMQ4yzHn3gz

What is this form of publication, can anyone tell me?

  : Тваринний світ Запорізької області у Червоній книзі України. Melitopol region: dovidnikove vidannya ([i]Animal world of Zaporizhia region in the Red Data Book of Ukraine. Melitopol region: reference publication"Interesting literature")

Pages of the Red Book of Ukraine 1 to 1 with maps and photos (with a small number of author's photos), with an additional section: The species ' camp in the Zaporizky region (Melitopol region) (The state of the species in the Zaporozhye region (region)), The main sources of information (it is not clear how they were formed, somewhere taken for Ukraine as a whole, where-something for the region (very selectively, somewhere both) and a mandatory author-compiler.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1V5Lgq21ha...bFVZRMQ4yzHn3gz

What is this form of publication, can anyone tell me?

So it also says: Melitopol region.

Funny reviews of the Red Books of Bashkortostan

VALUEV V. A. REVIEW OF V. N. OLSHVANG'S ESSAYS IN THE RED BOOK OF THE REPUBLIC OF BASHKORTOSTAN (2014) EDITED BY B. M. CHICHKOV


 ________.pdf

size: 329.93 k
number of downloads: 347








ZAGRIEV I. M. REVIEW OF P. Y. GORBUNOV'S ESSAYS "THE ORDER OF LEPIDOPTERA" IN THE RED BOOK OF THE REPUBLIC OF BASHKORTOSTAN (2014) (EDITOR-IN-CHIEF B. M. CHICHKOV)


 _____________________.pdf

size: 528.83 k
number of downloads: 436

I've read both reviews.
If Valuev writes even more or less civilly, then Zagriev is some kind of scumbag troll. A huge mass of gossip, envy, black stuff. In a word, the editor of this publication should not edit texts, but grow tomatoes.

We write, we argue, and they have all the same: https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_naseko...yy_book_Of Russia. No, well, we need to do something about it. Let's comment on this text. Based on your comments, I will write a letter to the luminaries of the "Red Book" and try to correct it. The most amused especially such pearls:

Of course, the same thing, because the link is a list of the CCRF of 2001 (which is written at the very beginning of the article). So it doesn't make sense to edit it. Moreover, the draft of a new CC list has been on the website of the Ministry of Natural Resources for more than a year, and at the end of last year, the Ministry of Natural Resources approved something. But the text of the order has not yet been published, so it is difficult to say what exactly was approved...

I didn't see the date... Then it's worth waiting. But if nothing changes in a year , I think we should edit such "materials".

Of course, the same thing, because the link is a list of the CCRF of 2001 (which is written at the very beginning of the article). So it doesn't make sense to edit it. Moreover, the draft of a new CC list has been on the website of the Ministry of Natural Resources for more than a year, and at the end of last year, the Ministry of Natural Resources approved something. But the text of the order has not yet been published, so it is difficult to say what exactly was approved...

The Consultant only has a project:
http://www.consultant.ru/cons/cgi/online.c...821588688643575

As far as we know, the new list should be sent out for approval or disapproval to the constituent entities of the Russian Federation. So far, this has not happened. The reasons are unclear, as the list was considered ready about 2 years ago.
At the same time, some experts sent their comments to the main curator of this project, Mr. Ilyashenko. And we are faced with the fact that some of the permanent authors of the CCRF completely ignore any comments. In particular, the author on dragonflies refused to exclude the mass eurybiont species sentinel-emperor from the CCRF and refused to include other really vulnerable species. Similarly, the authors of butterflies - Mazin and Sviridov. But if Mazin is an absolutely incompetent butterfly farmer, preserved in knowledge at the level of the early Korshunov era, then Sviridov was very constructive until recently and actively collaborated even with many "amateurs". And now he does not want to perceive anything - this, alas, is a medical fact.
Therefore, you can only smile at the naivety of Wild Yuri . If you, Yuri, are not known or little-known as an author of scientific papers, then this public will ignore your comments all the more.

This post was edited by Nemov - 17.02.2018 20: 54

Elizar, I am not so much competent as I know the situation from the inside. I may be wrong if high matters are involved. But after all, in the CCRF, everything is at a popular level, and in some cases it is difficult to be incompetent there. For example, the watchman Imperator now flies on almost all artificial ponds in the southern Moscow region, and in which Chinese tower does the "specialist" sit who does not see this? And does not read numerous articles on this topic! And in the case of butterflies, the authors of the CCRF operate with literature no later than the beginning of the 2000s, and then not all of it. For example, one of the Far Eastern pigeons that Yuri quoted above, according to "late" Korshunov, is an invaded species on the crops of Chinese agricultural crops and, therefore, it damages them with a nestling effect. But the authors of the CCRF ignore even this not-so-recent information.

This post was edited by Nemov - 18.02.2018 11: 00

"Mr." Nemov, give a couple of links to your work.....

From a long-standing conversation with an old Moscow intellectual hunter...

- "You are naive people, you always take care of your" beetles-cockroaches"... The fact is that at the top there is currently a very significant lobby interested in what would disappear from the pages of the Red Books of the Russian Federation some hunting, or rather trophy (read rare and endangered) species of animals on which they often hunt in the quiet (how many such videos from the Far North, Far East... when they catch rare whitefish, they beat geese, etc. CC rarities...) and they will hunt quite legally and without looking back. In the mass media, such a company has risen that you are amazed!? What is worth, for example, such a pearl-they say hundreds of thousands of ordinary Russian hunters and their family members gnobyat koi can not live without hunting for... Take, for example, the "Mountain Hunters' Club " where very rich people (who can easily pay for hundreds of custom-made articles to show the problems of QC in a favorable light for them) ride around the world for trophy animals... and they would like to hunt them more at home (probably cheaper)... So they and others like them slow down the "new edition of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation" finding fault even with such "trifles" as for example - " Oh, they want to ban hunting for the common turtledove!? This is unheard of! We beat her and will continue to beat her!!!" Forgetting at the same time that in the Middle Zone it is almost gone and they hunt it mainly on the autumn flight in the Ciscaucasia, shooting a team of several people-a hundred or two pieces for one hunt..."

https://newizv.ru/news/society/27-12-2017/g...ff-834ae3ab31b2

https://newizv.ru/news/society/18-12-2017/k...schih-zhivotnyh

https://ru.krymr.com/a/28943479.html

https://56orb.ru/news/society/21-12-2017/zv...-vidy-zhivotnyh

This post was edited by Penzyak - 19.02.2018 15: 08

Turtledoves TO HELL!!!

Who needs it? No meat, no skins, no feathers so-so.

Turtledoves TO HELL!!!

I have some vague doubts... There is a ringed turtle dove, here it is really up to horseradish, but this is a different species...

In Kiev, of course, only ringed. But I suspect, rhopalocera.com he has other regions in mind. Although, in principle, I don't understand why to shoot small birds, which in the number of one specimen per tooth is not enough, and also tend to reduce the number at least in part of the range, when there are plenty of large ones, which are constantly increasing the number everywhere (mallard, pheasant, coot). I definitely wanted tender pigeon meat - there is a lot of grayling everywhere, you want to shoot, you want to catch it with your hands. The French are generally perverts in this regard - they beat all the singers. What is there even after one pellet? You'd think they were hungry.

So that I won't be accused of biased material once again - that's what professional ornithologists say:

http://www.rbcu.ru/news/34246/

http://www.ohotniki.ru/hunting/societys/so...eznoveniyu.html

https://yandex.ru/yandsearch?clid=2039342&t...%B8%D1%8F&lr=49

This post was edited by Penzyak - 02/20/2018 14: 37

Professionals, of course, it can also be professionals..., but "So, the facts available in the Russian press indicate that on the auto route...".... So on the auto route, you can say with foam at the mouth that in the Novgorod and Pskov regions mnemosyne is extinct fuck!!! Legs should be, legs - and such storehouses will be found!!!
From the same article - " a negative factor is the pre-sowing treatment of grain with acutely toxic pesticides." What's the connection ? We have poisoned grain before, and without fail, and now we are poisoning it with fungicides!!! At least some rat-pigeon died. There are only more of them. The viagra effect, or what? And there are no turtledoves in the fields during field work, as well as pigeons - there are gulls, terns,corvids, and storks! And turtledoves appear - when wild boars and bears begin to dryuchit grain!

This is not about mnemosyne, but about the turtle dove. and this type is well taken into account along highways because of the habit of sitting on wires. If they still appear in the margins in your area , I'm happy for you. But we have almost stopped appearing.
At the expense of grain dressing, I agree, it's far-fetched...

This is not about mnemosyne, but about the turtle dove. and this type is well taken into account along highways because of the habit of sitting on wires. If they still appear in the margins in your area , I'm happy for you. But we have almost stopped appearing.
At the expense of grain dressing, I agree, it's far-fetched...

On the wires we have only starlings with swallows swaying And eat something they climb into the fields! I'm talking about turtledoves. Go out into the field, sit down.... aphids to see, and there are these over there-chewing grain!

About ordinary turtle-doves: in my childhood, I remember well, it was on the wires that they sat side by side. I haven't seen one in a long time. So, at least in some places, this bird is still extinct.

Our sparrows will soon need to be entered in the red book - almost all of them were eaten by gulls in the city. Still would pigeons who are interested.... I'm sick of those flying asses. And with turtledoves.... apparently, our dying agriculture still contributes to their survival.
It is not yet clear why Catocala fraxini was brought to the CC. In our country, in August-September, this is the dominant species of the genus. In rural areas, 15-20 pieces come to light per night.

So that I won't be accused of biased material once again - that's what professional ornithologists say:

http://www.rbcu.ru/news/34246/

http://www.ohotniki.ru/hunting/societys/so...eznoveniyu.html

https://yandex.ru/yandsearch?clid=2039342&t...%B8%D1%8F&lr=49

Where do we, sivolapim, to professional ornithologists.

After all, we don't have eyes, we can't tell the common one from the ringed one, and we can't tell the elk from the clint either, and in general, we don't need to look at the birds with our unprofessional eyes.

Where do we, sea lions, to professional ornithologists..., and in general, there is nothing for us to look at birds with our unprofessional eyes.

But if I'm smitten with catokalas, but I can't tell nupta from elokata in flight, then do I have to put my hands off entomology?

But if I'm smitten with catokalas, but I can't tell nupta from elokata in flight, then do I have to put my hands off entomology?

Any whim for your money (that is, a fine, if pym)