Caucasus, Ciscaucasia and Transcaucasia

To catch a hundred individuals in one day is comparable to what natural predators do: significant damage to the population.

It seems to me that "natural" predators "act" less selectively ...
so, the result of fishing, in this case, is more harmful to the population than "natural" predation.

Any human catch of even one butterfly affects the gene pool, because it is usually the most beautiful, large butterfly that is caught, and which has not yet been laid/mated. So you can, in theory, make a" bottleneck " if you selectively and well walk around a small station at the time of the peak of departure.
But if the stations are large, then this is all nonsense

To catch a hundred individuals in one day is comparable to what natural predators do: significant damage to the population. This is unjustified and unacceptable :/

It is written in Russian in white - this is material from different points along the 100 km path, and not a continuous mowing of the patch where Alyakastria flies. And she flew there almost everywhere, and not in one clearing. It turns out-no more than 10 individuals from a specific place.

Another merchant has become more. It's necessary to destroy a hundred kavkazikas...

Well , they get wet, Molozzas!!! It seems that someone is against catching butterflies like this.

This post was edited by Liparus - 13.05.2012 23: 25

Well , they get wet, Molozzas!!! It seems that someone is against catching butterflies like this.

I -- against.

Any human catch of even one butterfly affects the gene pool, because it is usually the most beautiful, large butterfly that is caught, and which has not yet been laid/mated. So you can, in theory, make a" bottleneck " if you selectively and well walk around a small station at the time of the peak of departure.
But if the stations are large, then this is all nonsense

Roman, to be honest, it is somewhat strange for me to read such posts from a person who is engaged in reptiles and regularly goes out to catch "for food" for his pets. As with similar to be? No gene pool is disturbed here? Insectivores are quite voracious: I kept it myself, so I know.

For cups, rain lids...

How do you rate it? I put it with lids. It turns out cleaner, but dreary. However, you have a much larger number.

To catch a hundred individuals in one day is comparable to what natural predators do: significant damage to the population. This is unjustified and unacceptable :/

Predator, singular. You Google open and try to find there those tiny glades through which this "predator" accidentally passed. Feel the scale. Then try it yourself and see the difference between viewing Google and the real area. I do not justify them at all, but it seems to me that all this talk about harm is highly subjective(moralistic) and has nothing to do with reality. Not only have I never caught a single polyxena in my entire life, but I've never even seen one of them alive, even though I've been to its habitats. Does this mean that they were exterminated by Soviet collectors long ago?

I'm against it.

Kiss the Red Bible goodnight and sleep well.

I've never taken more than 20 butterflies of the same species just to give them away to my friends. If you add 100 instances of the same type from the same region to your collection... However, this is a matter of taste and the amount of space allowed for the collection. And the difference between a beautiful daytime butterfly and a nocturnal moth near Moscow is really not big. Only the first one, everyone can see in nature and get aesthetic pleasure from its contemplation (at least until they are all caught for their collections), and the second one, except for catchers, no one will ever see in nature.

The only difference is that A. caucasica is not a species that you will go for every weekend, as you do with butterflies near Moscow, hammering the same Red Book species from year to year, and even "give away to friends".Don't mess up a branch with your masterpiece opuses.To you in the topic "The Red Book and insects:what are the origins of this nonsense"!

The only difference is that A. caucasica is not a species that you will go for every weekend, as you do with butterflies near Moscow, hammering the same Red Book species from year to year, and even "give away to friends".Don't mess up a branch with your masterpiece opuses.To you in the topic "The Red Book and insects:what are the origins of this nonsense"!

He does not" hammer", but carefully removes from nature a certain number of copies for the collection or at the request of friends who need them for the same purposes. All these points are well known to us for many years, and yet every year there fly live and healthy butterflies in no decreasing numbers.

Stop this pointless argument.
Allyankastriy on the exchange is not present? I'd trade for Central Asians.

there could have been alancastries in this place

This post was edited by El Cazador - 05/14/2012 17: 48

Pictures:

_____.jpg — (66.48к)

The only difference is that A. caucasica is not a species that you will go for every weekend, as you do with butterflies near Moscow, hammering the same Red Book species from year to year, and even "give away to friends".Don't mess up a branch with your masterpiece opuses.To you in the topic "The Red Book and insects:what are the origins of this nonsense"!

Obviously, a person has a certain kind of problem...
Another anonymous demagogue on the forum has become more. Read carefully (as many times as you need to remember and understand ?)before you start littering the thread with your nonsense. what is written, and then... And it is better not to write anything at all.
Where did you see references to the Red Book and butterfly conservation in my messages? In the first message, I implicitly expressed my attitude to the mass catch for sale. Secondly, he expressed confusion about the expediency of having such a huge series in his collection (trapper and I had mutual friends who brushed off my attacks on his commercial preferences). And your "hit - and-run" about constant fishing in the places of its permanent habitat-our company winds up 20-30 thousand km in a year on trips for butterflies, mainly during holidays. It may seem strange to you, but we also work 11 months a year and during this period it is problematic to catch further than at the dacha.
I'm not saying that it's much more useful to thoroughly explore your region than to make one-time trips to other regions, although this is less interesting.

Gentlemen, stop arguing.Here on 188 pages. men found a station of polyxena in MO and nobody noticed it....

Here on 188 pages. the guys found a polyxena station in the Moscow Region and no one noticed it....

Well, why didn't you notice? Very much even noticed: in Alpatievo (almost on the border with the Ryazan region). There, according to some reports, there are

Obviously, a person has a certain kind of problem...
Another anonymous demagogue on the forum has become more. Read carefully (as many times as you need to remember and understand ?)before you start littering the thread with your nonsense. what is written, and then... And it is better not to write anything at all.
Where did you see references to the Red Book and butterfly conservation in my messages? In the first message, I implicitly expressed my attitude to the mass catch for sale. Secondly, he expressed confusion about the expediency of having such a huge series in his collection (trapper and I had mutual friends who brushed off my attacks on his commercial preferences). And your "hit - and-run" about constant fishing in the places of its permanent habitat-our company winds up 20-30 thousand km in a year on trips for butterflies, mainly during holidays. It may seem strange to you, but we also work 11 months a year and during this period it is problematic to catch further than at the dacha.
I'm not saying that it's much more useful to thoroughly explore your region than to make one-time trips to other regions, although this is less interesting.

Dear Sergey, it was you who started this shit on the branch (apparently you have problems), and therefore let's look at the situation soberly. About 100 copies were caught. butterflies throughout the 100 km route, from different biotopes, from different spurs of the ridge. Roughly speaking, this is about 10 copies. from specific points. Is this really a lot, given the high variability? Or, if you didn't drown in a small river, die under a 50-pound backpack on a mountain climb, or come face-to-face with a bear on the trail, would you have caught a couple and settled down? I doubt it very much. And what moral right do you have to make statements about the caught material, if you do exactly the same thing everywhere and always? Or is it possible to be slightly pregnant? Therefore, do not engage in profanity. The report was not issued for you personally, no one asked for your opinion and do not broadcast on behalf of the entire forum. All the best.

Dear Sergey, it was you who started this shit on the branch (apparently you have problems), and therefore let's look at the situation soberly. About 100 copies were caught. butterflies throughout the 100 km route, from different biotopes, from different spurs of the ridge. Roughly speaking, this is about 10 copies. from specific points. Is this really a lot, given the high variability? Or, if you didn't drown in a small river, die under a 50-pound backpack on a mountain climb, or come face-to-face with a bear on the trail, would you have caught a couple and settled down? I doubt it very much. And what moral right do you have to make statements about the caught material, if you do exactly the same thing everywhere and always? Or is it possible to be slightly pregnant? Therefore, do not engage in profanity. The report was not issued for you personally, no one asked for your opinion and do not broadcast on behalf of the entire forum. All the best.

The question is not as simple as it seems to many here on the forum. The point here is no longer entomological, but ethical considerations. Not for nothing did several people talk about predators. So, a predator will not mindlessly kill a victim if it is not going to eat it now or later (with the exception, perhaps, of some cats, but this is not about that). And man as a predator differs from animals precisely in that he is often unreasonably bloodthirsty and pathologically greedy, too. Everything is always not enough for him, he needs to get his hands on everything that his burning eyes see, grab everything and more. Even if it's not particularly necessary. Yes, we are already shitting nature with our factories, oil spills, river closures-those who wish can continue the list themselves-that 100 captured butterflies will not make special weather any more. But isn't it natural for a person to at least spare a little of his victims and collect only what he really needs to satisfy his own vanity, and if he really wants to, take pictures of the rest and leave them to live out their lives in the wild? Moreover, most butterflies are just ephemeris by our standards: a week - and she will glue her wings together...
Are we humans or soulless terminators-that's the question.

This post was edited by aleko - 15.05.2012 09: 16

Well, why didn't you notice? Very much even noticed: in Alpatievo (almost on the border with the Ryazan region). There, according to some reports, there are Podaliriyas

Almost borderline,but still MO right now.Although 500 years ago Kolomna and its surrounding area belonged to the Ryazan Principality...

Almost borderline,but still MO right now.Although a little over 500 years ago Kolomna and its surrounding area belonged to the Ryazan Principality...

Why 500? Just over 100 years ago, Lukhovitsy, Zaraysk, and Alpatyevo belonged to the Ryazan province.
UPD: by the way, until now the coats of arms of Dankov and Zaraysk, among other Ryazan cities, are flaunted in the form of bas-reliefs on the Ryazan Wedding Palace, the former building of the Noble Assembly.

This post was edited by aleko - 15.05.2012 09: 32

I drew a straight line so as not to argue.
The Slemy platform, which follows Alpatievo from Moscow, is already located on the regional border.

Pictures:

pic_2.jpg — (134.35к)

Dear Sergey, it was you who started this shit on the branch (apparently you have problems), and therefore let's look at the situation soberly. About 100 copies were caught. butterflies throughout the 100 km route, from different biotopes, from different spurs of the ridge. Roughly speaking, this is about 10 copies. from specific points. Is this really a lot, given the high variability? Or, if you didn't drown in a small river, die under a 50-pound backpack on a mountain climb, or come face-to-face with a bear on the trail, would you have caught a couple and settled down? I doubt it very much. And what moral right do you have to make statements about the caught material, if you do exactly the same thing everywhere and always? Or is it possible to be slightly pregnant? Therefore, do not engage in profanity. The report was not issued for you personally, no one asked for your opinion and do not broadcast on behalf of the entire forum. All the best.

What heroes you are, though! And you didn't drown in the river, and the 50-kg backpack didn't crush you, and the bear didn't tear you apart. The rest can be seen going outside, putting up a net and waiting for the required number of necessary insects to fly there.
Make no mistake, I wouldn't take that much. The forum is full of my reports from various places, and it's not difficult to verify the amount of material I collect. But variability exists in all species and alancastry is far from the most variable.
If you write something on a general forum, then you should be prepared that everyone (including me) can express their opinion.
And explain what you consider profanity in my messages? In my opinion, this is someone else perestrivaet facts / distorts in a convenient manner for you. They also added some kind of moral right. It also turns out that I wrote something from the entire forum... According to Roman (Omar), I have a better opinion of you.
I hope that Bolivar will appear and clean up all our joint flood that is not related to the topic from this branch.

What heroes you are, though! And you didn't drown in the river, and the 50-kg backpack didn't crush you, and the bear didn't tear you apart. The rest can be seen going outside, putting up a net and waiting for the required number of necessary insects to fly there.
Make no mistake, I wouldn't take that much. The forum is full of my reports from various places, and it's not difficult to verify the amount of material I collect. But variability exists in all species and alancastry is far from the most variable.
If you write something on a general forum, then you should be prepared that everyone (including me) can express their opinion.
And explain what you consider profanity in my messages? In my opinion, this is someone else perestrivaet facts / distorts in a convenient manner for you. They also added some kind of moral right. It also turns out that I wrote something from the entire forum... According to Roman (Omar), I have a better opinion of you.
I hope that Bolivar will appear and clean up all our joint flood that is not related to the topic from this branch.

Seryoga, how many copies do you consider reasonable? I'm asking this so that I won't get caught in the distribution in the future... well, and so that I can sometimes stop you

What heroes you are, though! And you didn't drown in the river, and the 50-kg backpack didn't crush you, and the bear didn't tear you apart. The rest can be seen going outside, putting up a net and waiting for the required number of necessary insects to fly there.

Judging by the sarcasm, apart from driving and living in tolerable conditions, you haven't had anything yet.

Make no mistake, I wouldn't take that much. The forum is full of my reports from various places, and it's not difficult to verify the amount of material I collect. But variability exists in all species and alancastry is far from the most variable.

Your volume of content and your position are your personal preferences, which are not interesting to everyone.

And explain what you consider profanity in my messages? In my opinion, this is someone else perestrivaet facts / distorts in a convenient manner for you. They also added some kind of moral right. It also turns out that I wrote something from the entire forum... According to Roman (Omar), I have a better opinion of you.

The profanity is that by doing the same thing, only removing a smaller amount of material from nature, you correctly consider yourself a benevolent and decent gentleman. At the same time, turning to individuals with unflattering epithets, such as this "There are more anonymous demagogues on the forum". Your opinion of me from the words of another person, I am not very concerned. I'm not a chervonets to please everyone. By the way, we talked at the last congress.

I hope that Bolivar will appear and clean up all our joint flood that is not related to the topic from this branch.

Of course, especially since there is a separate topic for a stupid sracha.

Guys, at all times biological science was IMPOSSIBLE without removing biological objects from nature. Something? Photos? I'll see how you cook and photograph the genitals of the photo. Or you can sequence a piece of a photo. In many cases, the study of biological objects is far from the concept of humane housewives.

The sample size (100 butterflies on a route of 100 km) is not large. There are ground beetles who destroy everything in glasses by kilograms - no one writes angry pamphlets. But there everything is much worse - indiscriminate destruction. Platitudes that no one needs, traps are killed by thousands, and no one takes them - and they go to feed worms near the parking lots of researchers.

Guys, at all times biological science was IMPOSSIBLE without removing biological objects from nature. Something? Photos? I'll see how you cook and photograph the genitals of the photo. Or you can sequence a piece of a photo. In many cases, the study of biological objects is far from the concept of humane housewives.

The sample size (100 butterflies on a route of 100 km) is not large. There are ground beetles who destroy everything in glasses by kilograms - no one writes angry pamphlets. But there everything is much worse - indiscriminate destruction. Platitudes that no one needs, traps are killed by thousands, and no one takes them - and they go to feed worms near the parking lots of researchers.

It's amazing how easily any demagogy can be brought "under science"!
Are you absolutely sure that this man caught 100 specimens of the same species for scientific research, and not to satisfy his own vanity? (we do not touch the topic of self-interest here). This kind of stopizzot times learned-retrained, probably dissertations on it have already been written. Why then such barbaric fishing in this particular case, can you explain sensibly to some impenetrable dullards like me?

I caught this weekend at the dacha on the light. This is only the second time I've seen Peridea anceps, so I took it. But, apparently, ethyl acetate podvydokh, she woke up in the morning, beat in the box and wiped off "to zero". So I feel sorry for her alone - not as a rare species for me, but as a mediocre ruined life.
Now it is fashionable to believe in God. Just think about whether he's sitting over us right now with tweezers and choosing who to pull out and put in a jar of cyanide.

Well, I also caught a good female Clostera curtula at home the other day, very quickly put it on the straightener, but it was not completely starved. I wake up in the morning to find that she has "plucked caviar" for me to spread out (already in a straightened state). I injected her with ammonia and threw out her eggs . Do you want to sprinkle ashes on your head now?

Well, I also caught a good female Clostera curtula at home the other day, very quickly put it on the straightener, but it was not completely starved. I wake up in the morning to find that she has "plucked caviar" for me to spread out (already in a straightened state). I injected her with ammonia and threw out her eggs . Do you want to sprinkle ashes on your head now?

I'm not talking about dusting your head with ashes, but about a senseless mass gathering. In fact, if not for science and not for determining in difficult cases by the genitals (and tell me, do many of you really do this?) - 2-3 copies are enough. Well, in the case of really incredible variability, as in Angerona prunaria, for example, - about a dozen, and even then, I think, it's already too much.

It's amazing how easily any demagogy can be brought "under science"!
Are you absolutely sure that this man caught 100 specimens of the same species for scientific research, and not to satisfy his own vanity? ...

Look, mil-man, a sample of a particular species with a shown range offset and color variability, already has a scientific component. And here is what you do, catching 1-2 copies each. in the country, not sleeping at night from a sense of pity and shame, except for the empty destruction of individuals, can not be called. Think about why you kill insects?

Look, mil-man, a sample of a particular species with a shown range offset and color variability, already has a scientific component. And here is what you do, catching 1-2 copies each. in the country, not sleeping at night from a sense of pity and shame, except for the empty destruction of individuals, can not be called. Think about why you kill insects?

Lovely! From the discussion of the topic, we smoothly move on to the discussion of personalities. This is exactly what is called demagoguery! Besides, do you really represent science here? I didn't see it on your profile.
I repeat once again that the specific information occasion that gave rise to our discussion has nothing to do with true science. Absolutely! And I am as sure of this as I am of the fact that it is up to them to decide how and what to do in their dachas for nice people in general.

This is not the first time such disputes have been held on the forum about the catch rate.
My advice to envious people with clumsy hands is not to breed aggressive demagoguery here ,but to put various collective farmers and farmers into practice in the fields, forests, and environmental education.
Weak?

... what to do and what to do in their dachas to nice people in general, they decide for themselves.

This is the key phrase of your message. So you don't have a solid argument to logically explain why you killed insects. On the scientific component in a specific information issue-time will put everything in its place.

The transition to personalities is made in the message 9472 of this topic.
But this is not essential.
Genital analysis is very often required for much more extensive material than you think. And not everything and not always so simple, even in diaries, as you see it. Last time (a week ago, for almost 5 days) I cooked the genitals and recorded the signs in 200 males. And it didn't give any result. Then I cooked 20 females - and the result was almost immediately. That there are ten grand in there... And the view, I must say-BANAL.

Believe me, our knowledge of butterflies is still very RUDIMENTARY in many ways. The variability of the genitals is at zero. What we know is just a tiny bit. Trophic connections - 90% of the information of the last or penultimate century from Western publications. What they eat here - no one really studied (with the exception, perhaps, of Voronezh entomologists :D) .

Ahuet what nice people gathered! For one, those who catch less than a thousand a day are "envious people with clumsy handles", the other tries on the halo of a future scientist, in fact being exactly the same advanced summer resident, but only impudent, cheeky and unceremonious.
And the rest of them "likes" are placed. Just not an entomological forum, but a serpentarium on Facebook of some kind.

The transition to personalities is made in the message 9472 of this topic.
But this is not essential.

No, this is a matter of principle. Indicate in what place exactly what person I was undeservedly offended, and I will apologize publicly here in this forum to this person. Apparently, what allows itself Entalex, the transition to foxness is not considered?

Ahuet what nice people gathered! For one, those who catch less than a thousand a day are "envious people with clumsy handles", the other tries on the halo of a future scientist, in fact being exactly the same advanced summer resident, but only impudent, cheeky and unceremonious.
And the rest of them "likes" are placed. It's not an entomological forum, but a serpentarium on Facebook of some kind.

Well, the light elf's mask fell to the floor, revealing a banal orc's grin to the world.
(sorry, that was a bit rude.)

This post was edited by Entalex - 15.05.2012 12: 13

Apparently, what allows itself Entalex, the transition to foxness is not considered?

Show me a specific personality transition in my messages.

Show me a specific personality transition in my messages.

Post 9475, if you don't understand. If before this conversation was about trends, then in this post you went on to discuss my personal affairs and actions, and began to give me advice.

No, this is a matter of principle. Indicate in what place exactly what person I was undeservedly offended, and I will apologize publicly here in this forum to this person. Apparently, what allows itself Entalex, the transition to foxness is not considered?

my personality was wronged.

to rhopalocera.com: