About tropics, merchants, and personal preferences

Dear Amara, and you can honestly look into the eyes and point by point (1,2,3...): what is so hated by merchants? If only by the fact that some people may have succeeded in something, but you don't have it in this direction, or it's just envious, as in the old days, that the neighbor's hut doesn't light up in any way - this is one thing, maybe it's worth rummaging in yourself.
If the hatred is related to some harm caused by merchants (meaning ONLY insect collectors, deforestation, etc. we do not mean) the NUMBER of insects, then please CORRECTLY justify your position.
What do you call RULES and CONCEPTS???? And who made up the rules??? Aren't those LOSERS from various nature protection organizations who have not achieved ANYTHING in science, not, sorry, in commerce, and only launder money allocated by all sorts of dubious funds, entering Papilio machaon in the Red Books, just because he doesn't fly on the 17th floor of their office on Novy Arbat. Think about who comes up with SUCH rules, those who have NEVER picked up a net. It's just too weak to protect forests, fight pollution, and so on - because it's DIFFICULT and requires WORK, and here, alas.... These are not the right people... The Red Book is warm, well-fed, cozy and flies do not bite, and then, even if the grass does not grow...

First of all, I have already said that they are not hated at all. Especially those who respect the laws (this is my personal opinion).
Secondly, I see you all know so well that I have nothing to add.

I can tell you what I don't like about merchants. They sell what material things in this life I love most tenderly and reverently. They sell the object of my love. And money can't buy love. Some of them destroy insects en masse, throwing out slightly worn or slightly damaged specimens, which, nevertheless, were destroyed. Some carabus catchers disdainfully throw out all the other small things from their glasses, because they can't sell them. They treat catching insects like making money. They usually have little interest in live insects before being caught. They are able to change the place of catching an insect, if it can be sold more expensively thanks to this. I'm not saying that every entomology businessman behaves this way. But the share of such people makes itself felt. And more. Pavel, it is not necessary to agulno all those who make up the red books, to dress up as narrow-minded and stupid losers who have not found any other shelter in life and have not done anything useful in science. this is about the same thing that I will now start accusing all insect sellers of dishonesty on all the points I have indicated. And the swallowtail-well, it is certainly not uncommon, but it is not such a mass species that it was urgently necessary to exclude it from the red books, at least in central Russia. A big beautiful butterfly, and from its protection humanity, as it seems to me, will not lose.

Well, the topic is raised regularly and you will never be able to agree on it, it's like physics and lyrics, to some extent. I adhere to the point of view of my highly respected V. S. Murzin, and he was never a merchant and sincerely loved butterflies. As for businessmen, I absolutely agree that there are people among them who are, to put it mildly, unscrupulous in their actions in various areas, and this can and should be fought. Just as it is necessary to fight against businessmen from nature protection, who make it their life's work to earn money on your love. Changing the place of capture is generally a crime, I agree, but I didn't focus on these subtleties... the question was raised about the destruction of insects in nature.
Well, the swallowtail... krnechno humanity will not lose... you will lose (well, if of course, you catch Rhopalocera) when some lawyer writes you a receipt for a fine according to the officially accepted price list, and you will be surprised, because this will affect you personally, and not humanity. Humanity is made up of people. Well, as for the mass character... many species in the Moscow region, especially moths, are very rare, but this is not because humanity does not see them! It doesn't want to see them, and it doesn't know how to see them, and nobody shows them. They just fly when humanity is asleep. Well, do not consider them rare.
It seems to me that if we don't fight idiocy in our lives, then we will get bogged down in them, or we will pay fines for every honeybee hit by a car, it's a pity, really a pity, in a human way, but in my opinion we are going the wrong way.
In fact, it's probably worth ending the skirmish with opinions, since ALL opinions have the right to life. And I apologize if I accidentally offended someone, I didn't mean to. Of course, there are freaks among merchants and wonderful people among nature conservationists! Just like you always want perfection, but it will never be there...

you will lose (well, if of course, you catch Rhopalocera) when some lawyer writes you a receipt for a fine according to the officially accepted price list, and you will be surprised, because this will affect you personally, and not humanity.
Do you believe that? Have you ever met at least one person in Russia who could issue a fine for a swallowtail caught outside a nature reserve?

Not yet! But from idea to implementation.... I spent twenty-four hours in a jail in Ceylon with A.Sochivko and V. Murzinym for the night material (two boxes of tattoos), paid a $ 900 fine (they counted copies and not for a pupaar). Caught not in the nat.in the park! While we were in the country, the second time (the first time, we caught, took out-legally! A law was passed prohibiting the capture and export of mammals, birds, Reptiles and Amphibians from Ceylon. At first (in court, which was the next day), we argued that insects are not one of the four above categories (fortunately, but not for us, they forgot or did not want to include them in the list), alas. Then we (when we were released, fined and selected) visited the Natural History Museum in Colombo, I don't think I can comment on the state of the local insect display. We have reached the entomologist - the ONLY ONE in Ceylon. A nice woman, a CHEMIST, but she was asked to work as an entomologist. All she could tell were the beetles and butterflies from each other. She complained that all our fees (they were confiscated) will come to them, but they do not need them, since there is no one to study. I think they were devoured long ago, and according to Murzin, there were new taxa and quite a lot of them.
By the way, until now, after 10 years, I still receive a greeting card from this museum every year for the new year...
But there were plenty of nature conservationists and the price list was found (they counted it as reptiles), and they could have found it as elephants. Here is such a nature protection is obtained.
As for the reality of fines, price lists, licenses.... You are breaking the law!!!! Unfortunately, you are illegally catching beetles in the Moscow region! (I'm exaggerating, of course.) However, if you are familiar with Zhuravlev, you can ask him to tell you how he repeatedly visited a well-known organization in order to obtain permits for catching material in the Moscow region.
How it ended, he will tell you.
I don't want us to go the Ceylon way, because one Mitvol (in terms of activity) is enough and everything will change in a week, and appraisers and tax collectors will appear.

A Belgian friend told me that one of the national parks in France not only allowed everyone to catch butterflies, but also encouraged it in every possible way. We came to the conclusion that this is very good for studying insects in a protected area. Amateurs and professionals from the outside are the most important source of information about the state of the park's entomofauna. By God, I'm not lying. It would be like this everywhere.

This is how amateurs make up the lion's share of the fees that scientists then work with.
About commerce: In Primorye, the hostess we lived with asked how much we would sell butterflies in Moscow. This topic was not taken up by us at all then, she spontaneously asked.
And in Peru, "insanely expensive butterflies for oligarchs" often fly there almost in garbage dumps.
In Nepal, in particular, commonplace (not just an ordinary butterfly, but commonplace) were Troides, listed in the Red Books and applications of CITES.

Just fly high

The activity of such individuals as Mitvol seems to me paid from above and in advance in relation to only those who are not needed. And really to* * *sya to some crank with a net on the side of the road is just unrealistic. If only because these molesters will require not only knowledge of the laws, but also entomology at least within the school limits

I read everything with interest. Personally, the closest thing to me (right in my heart) is the omar position, a.

Maybe someone will take the liberty to name at least one fact of the COMPLETE disappearance of the taxon "thanks" to merchants???? We are waiting-with a sensation!

"I don't know, there won't be a sensation. However, the satire Neonympha mitchellii was exterminated in New Jersey. The species is very specialized, inhabiting swamps of a special type. There were several populations. The pickers went from day to day and caught everything they saw. In a few years, they were exhausted. And the swamps just remained.

The species, fortunately, has been preserved so far in some other (few) states in some colonies (even some previously unknown ones were recently found).

New Jersey residents are probably especially offended.

It wasn't a good thing with this bug either:
http://www.arkive.org/carabo-beetle/carabu...mpiae/info.html

And what was the trick with it?

If my memory serves me correctly, it was on the verge of extinction (a narrow range somewhere in the Italian Alps, and the bug is beautiful). Like acclimatized in France, well, at least caught on.

And once again, there are scandals on the topic "entomologist-merchant-good or bad".
This depends on what interests in entomology the panelists have.
Personally, I am willing to buy the material, because my interests go beyond the Moscow region and the Russian Federation. So far, not every season I can afford to go out for butterflies. And if it was possible to get out, then to some extent clumsily.
Well, if there is an opportunity (especially since there is an offer), why not add to the collection in a simpler way and arrange a small holiday for yourself?
But, here, if a person is engaged in a group that is not commercially interesting and does not come into contact with merchants in any way, then commercial entomology should generally be on his side. Isn't it?
If he collects and relies only on his own strength, then there is nothing to look at others. But there are some comrades who do not even recognize the exchange of material. Like, " I'll catch it myself." Yes, no problem, flag in hand.

And, returning to the topic, I will add: is there really no human pity for people who find themselves in such a situation far from home?

This post was edited by Morozzz - 12/15/2008 10: 21

I agree with Morozzz, everyone chooses the method of adding money to the collection for themselves. I don't buy it, and believe me, not because of the lack of financial opportunities, but because of the lack of interest in the purchased copy. Well, that's my quirk, if you like. I don't impose my opinion on anyone. And I have a purely aesthetic interest in the collection compiled by the "purchasing" method, but I am not envious and eager to go this way. In addition, when talking about entomology merchants, it is necessary to carefully refer to all of them as entomologists. It seems to me that entomologist is a narrower concept. Among such merchants, along with people who are seriously engaged in entomology as a branch of knowledge (whether at the professional or amateur level), and simultaneously solve their material problems at the expense of commerce (and who doesn't have them?), there are also just collectors-merchants. Of course, they have more or less specialized knowledge (and how can they do it without it?), but in the first place they have commerce, and not a reverent attitude (which omar mentioned) to the subject that brings them income. That is, in my opinion, it is not correct to call every such collector an entomologist in a narrow, professional or amateur sense. And the compatriots who got into trouble, of course, are humanly sorry, regardless of the reasons why they had problems in this situation.

This post was edited by Dmitrich - 12/15/2008 10: 50

I don't buy it, and believe me, not because of the lack of financial opportunities, but because of the lack of interest in the purchased copy. Well, that's my quirk, if you like. I don't impose my opinion on anyone. And I have a purely aesthetic interest in the collection compiled by the "purchasing" method, but I am not envious and eager to go this way.

Me too. And in general, the specimen in the collection is interesting to me only for understanding how this type differs from another, and is attached so that you can make a definition without peeling off the paper, that is, without any aesthetics. Probably in this (in beetles) I'm not a collector at all..

And I have, I admit, there is still a very strong "hunting" component. For me, buying a beetle in the collection is the same as for a "real" hunter not to get a trophy himself with a gun, but to buy ready-made stuffed animals.

Yes, an unpleasant situation has occurred with entomologists in Peru, it's a pity. Moreover, I myself was in such a situation when I returned from Afghanistan, but there was no publicity (with partial confiscation).

It seems to me that if a butterfly lays 1000 eggs, then TWO offspring must survive to maintain balance.... And that, in your opinion, 998 copies were also killed by merchants, or are there still other culprits???

In other words, the merchants "soaked" the LAST TWO descendants, who were supposed to lay a new 1000 eggs.
If the hunters took "their" two copies at the egg stage, there would be no questions.

"I don't know, there won't be a sensation. However, the satire Neonympha mitchellii was exterminated in New Jersey. The species is very specialized, inhabiting swamps of a special type. There were several populations. The pickers went from day to day and caught everything they saw. In a few years, they were exhausted. And the swamps just remained.

It's interesting, but if the collectors took up the Crimean Tomares nogelii, what would be left of it? Populations are local and very small, butterflies are not particularly shy, they sit on a feeding plant, come and take at least all of them. However, it would be ridiculous to say that collectors can destroy, for example, Crimean Euchloe ausonia or Satyrus virbius-banal mass species.

It seems to me that this topic is an excellent illustration of the "attitude of ordinary people to entomologists", which has been repeatedly exaggerated before.
And the least pleasant "philistine", of course,are the authorities.
It is surprising that many respected people and professionals
take an unambiguously "pro-government" position-in defense of small beetles exterminated by evil merchants.
.. their efforts can definitely save nature.

It seems to me that this topic is an excellent illustration of the "attitude of ordinary people to entomologists", which has been repeatedly exaggerated before.
And the least pleasant "philistine", of course,are the authorities.
It is surprising that many respected people and professionals
take an unambiguously "pro-government" position-in defense of small beetles exterminated by evil merchants.
.. their efforts can definitely save nature.

In addition, it should be said that entomologists themselves with a philistine worldview abound.

By the way, about the philistine worldview.
How many people live in China? A billion and a half?
How much is there in India? A billion?
How many people live in Indochina countries? another 700 million?
Anyone who has been on vacation in Thailand has seen, I hope, fried cicadas, whiteflies and other insects and other arthropods.
It's wild to eat all sorts of beetles-cockroaches, a few arthropods that we eat, and then not every day - it's shrimp, crayfish, crabs. And in Asia, even ants are eaten.
There is only one reliably extinct species due to the fault of humans-a large barbel from Fiji.
And who destroyed it? entomologists?
The locals ate it. They just ate it.

But now the local inhabitants of tropical countries are watching around the clock so that some sahib, gringo, etc. does not covet their insects.

This post was edited by Morozzz - 12/15/2008 17: 51

  
Do you believe that? Have you ever met at least one person in Russia who could issue a fine for a swallowtail caught outside a nature reserve?

I believe you! It is enough only to give an employee of the relevant authorities the right to levy fines. Otherwise, financially INTEREST YOU! The reaction will be like in the joke about traffic police officers: "they have been driving for free for n hours", in other words, they go with nets/test tubes.

Ugh, ugh, I'm knocking on wood!!!!

Unfortunately, you're not quite right. I was told of situations where hunters can almost destroy a population:
A small hill in the steppe where a local population of butterflies lives. These butterflies also fly out together, fly for a short time, etc. As I was told, such populations were almost destroyed by commercial hunters. I was told Latin, but I'm not a lepidopterist, so I don't remember it.
Clearly, such cases are a rare exception. "Normally" insects can be exterminated only by destroying the appropriate habitat.

well, I wrote in parentheses that unless they can trample a small population.. (Even worse, if sheep trample it much faster and no one will have butterflies )


In general, there are "freaks" among scientists and among merchants. Surely people who decided to become pure merchants were originally amateurs. Hardly any person would go to no one knows where it is not known for what, just because he was told that somewhere dozens of parnassus fly for a couple of hundred each..
So it is clear that among the merchants there are good people and notorious scoundrels who will cut down any forest themselves if they are well paid )

And I also like thickheads, but at least someone sells thickheads!!! except for Osipov, but he doesn't have many species. And in general, very few people like them, so it's impossible to change them.. And to catch them, I'll never catch them all, so why not buy them!

But there are also such "merchants" who catch both for their collection and for exchange/sale. Often there is nothing to exchange with such people, or it is difficult to exchange for some reason, so it is better to buy and not suffer - the ex will not become less valuable or attractive from this! Probably some people just have complexes left over from Soviet times or developed as a result of life circumstances, which leads to the fact that these people are afraid of buying / selling insects and associate the bad reputation of money with the purchased material.

Frozz:
barbel by any chance-is it not Xixuthrus of some kind?

And those in trouble, in my opinion, did not deserve such a fate

As far as I remember, Xixuthrus from Fiji is still not extinct. About a year ago I read that they caught either a Canadian or an American who tried to take out live beetles

these people are afraid of buying / selling insects and associate the bad reputation of money with the purchased material.

Dear RippeR, the question is basically a small one, but if you don't mind, please explain this idea to me. I didn't get it . First, what does "bad reputation for money" mean? No matter how banal, but without money, life is not possible, and as a general rule, money can not have a bad reputation, because it is earned by work. It's another matter if this money is "dirty" (for example, from criminal proceeds, etc.). Here, such money has a bad reputation. But this is a special case. And what is the relationship between the reputation of money and the purchased material? Everyone spends the money they earn at their own discretion, and still gets something with it. Someone wants to buy entomological material from them - so what's the deal? This is his choice, and others should not care! This is not about this, but about the personal attitude of everyone to the method of adding to the collection. At the same time, regardless of the method chosen by the collector to replenish their personal collection, any path is respected, except theft!

Thank you Dmitrich, I wanted to say something similar myself, but I "chewed" (=chickened out).

Dear RippeR, the question is basically a small one, but if you don't mind, please explain this idea to me. I didn't get it . First, what does "bad reputation for money" mean? No matter how banal, but without money, life is not possible, and as a general rule, money can not have a bad reputation, because it is earned by work. It's another matter if this money is "dirty" (for example, from criminal proceeds, etc.). Here, such money has a bad reputation. But this is a special case. And what is the relationship between the reputation of money and the purchased material? Everyone spends the money they earn at their own discretion, and still gets something with it. Someone wants to buy entomological material from them - so what's the deal? This is his choice, and others should not care! This is not about this, but about the personal attitude of everyone to the method of adding to the collection. At the same time, regardless of the method chosen by the collector to replenish their personal collection, any path is respected, except theft!

Despite the fact that money is earned by work and everyone needs money, many people consider money "dirt".
In other words, they think that the money is dirty (any money and not because they were soiled )
They also believe that money can't buy everything, that some things bought with money are not real, etc. (such concepts as friendship, love, etc., etc.). They say they don't live for money, but they spend their whole lives making money. Statements like "money is not the main thing in life." etc.
When they say you can earn money, they answer "What do you need to do!?" and "When we start". When they say "It costs money", the answer is "I don't play like that" ))

Those. no matter how you look at it, but in the subconscious we have since childhood laid down that money is bad. Of course, with a focus on certain things - not on buying bread.
By the way, if someone has more money, they are often disliked, and not because this person works more!

So it turns out in the end that swapping beetles is good, but buying/selling is ignorance. Changed the bug or gave-happiness, and the bought bug, so directly is not of interest....

Those. no matter how you look at it, but in the subconscious we have since childhood laid down that money is bad. Of course, with a focus on certain things - not on buying bread.
By the way, if someone has more money, they are often disliked, and not because this person works more!

So it turns out in the end that swapping beetles is good, but buying/selling is ignorance. Changed the bug or gave-happiness, and the bought bug, so directly is not of interest....

Since childhood, we have a lot of things laid down in us, but not everything that is laid down is correct. Money is just a universal equivalent of goods and services. Colored pieces of paper, not good, not bad. Another thing is how this or that person receives this money. What is acceptable (the method of getting) for one is unacceptable (and frowned upon) for the other.
As for buying insects, everyone chooses on what principles to make their collection. One is interested in satisfying his "hunting instinct", naturally buying insects for such a person is meaningless. Another person is interested in collecting the most complete selection of a certain group. In this case, buying is just one of the ways to complete your "gallery".
Personally, I share the position of Mr. amara, I am also not a collector, I collect mainly for technical purposes, for example, in order to consider the small differences of similar species.

I didn't say anything about this

So it turns out in the end that swapping beetles is good, but buying/selling is ignorance. Changed the bug or gave-happiness, and the bought bug, so directly is not of interest....

I understand what you're trying to say. But, believe me, your opinion is categorical, erroneous, and, more precisely, has nothing to do with life. The beetle (butterfly) in any case is of interest, just put in my personal collection bought to me (personally to me!) not interesting. But this does not in the least denigrate the collections of my esteemed colleagues who have chosen a different (more extended) way of adding to their collection. The purchase of the material has one obvious disadvantage - the reliability of labeling. But this is a completely different topic, which has more to do with decency.

well, to each his own

Hello everyone!
I'm new here, but one entomologist (who was detained in Peru ) I know well this is my colleague and friend, he is a collector just like us and does a little commerce, in general, he helped catch his friends and himself a little to replenish the collection.

There is only one reliably extinct species due to the fault of humans-a large barbel from Fiji.
And who destroyed it? entomologists?
The locals ate it. They just ate it.

If you mean Xixuthrus heros or X. heyrowskyi, then I can make you happy - both of these species are alive and well, but very rare

This post was edited by Albatus-08.01.2009 15: 25

What is the dispute about?Commerce and science, personal qualities and opportunities of people, honesty, conscience, cunning and deceit, are so intertwined in this life that it is necessary to perceive it as part of this world!Once upon a time, fartsovschikov was also condemned and disliked,but only from them it was possible to buy "rotting bourgeois" goods and currency, which we all lacked so much. In my opinion, it is great that to achieve your goals ( and in entomology, too) you can "go" and you can "go" !
Or you can alternate one with the other. This is nothing more than a choice. And no commercial entomologist "mows down" the insect world in the same way as grass-roots and top fires, plowing virgin land, cutting down forests, draining swamps, grazing livestock, haymaking, construction, man-made disasters, etc. Don't you think it's strange that even in the tropics, in order to catch the maximum variety of species, you need to go some distance away from a remote village? Because all that is moving around the locals ATE ! So "the threat is not coming from there..."

The need to combat man-made disasters, fires, deforestation, drainage, grazing, etc. does not negate the need to combat poachers in general and entomologists-violators in particular. This all looks like a great excuse - that just because there is global corruption in the country, total theft, so nothing terrible will happen if I bribe a traffic cop or steal a can of condensed milk in a store, because this will not affect the country's GDP. It also reminds me of the excuse of a thief caught stealing a wallet, that my theft is bullshit, because Berezovsky (Abramovich, Baturina... - insert the appropriate last name) disproportionately steal more. You can steal if you really want to or can't do without it - some lofty goals of yours require it, you can. But you should be clearly aware of what you are doing, and if anything happens, be ready to respond and take responsibility. You don't have to make up lofty excuses about fires, land reclamation workers, and damned bureaucrats and try to put a lofty, law-abiding expression on your face. If I kill someone out of curiosity, and then I agree that wars all over the world still kill a lot of people, it won't affect the population - will it count for me?

This post was edited by Salix - 10.01.2009 04: 35

Thank you for your post Salix, I'm relieved, I was already starting to think that I was the only one who was so "strange".

This all looks like a great excuse - that just because there is global corruption in the country, total theft, so nothing terrible will happen if I bribe a traffic cop or steal a can of condensed milk in a store, because this will not affect the country's GDP. It also reminds me of the excuse of a thief caught stealing a wallet, that my theft is bullshit, because Berezovsky (Abramovich, Baturina... - insert the appropriate last name) disproportionately steal more. You can steal if you really want to or can't do without it - some lofty goals of yours require it, you can. But you should be clearly aware of what you are doing, and if anything happens, be ready to respond and take responsibility. You don't have to make up lofty excuses about fires, land reclamation workers, and damned bureaucrats and try to put a lofty, law-abiding expression on your face. If I kill someone out of curiosity, and then I agree that wars all over the world still kill a lot of people, it won't affect the population - will it count for me?

By the way, yes. I recently spoke with an employee of the prosecutor's office who handles complaints from prisoners. So, if my memory serves me correctly, 94% of prisoners believe that they are sitting for nothing - "they were closed for lawlessness".

Salix, my congratulations!