Subject: Re: National Parks vs. collecting

From: [email-masked] (Pierre A Plauzoles)
Date: Sun, 19 Mar 1995 23:40:35 GMT

In a previous article, [email-masked] (KENELM W PHILIP) says:

>The recent posting by Jim Kruse about National Park staff looking for net-
>wielders gives (perhaps unintentionally) an impression that this is a recent
>problem. Not so--it has been illegal to collect insects without a permit in
>National Parks for decades, and the law has been enforced for decades. These
>laws indeed make little sense as far as protecting insects goes--but if
>all of us ignored laws that don't make sense to us things could get pretty
>chaotic.

Point quite well taken.  Not only NPS, though: BLM, is too, as are a 
number of state agencies.

I do, however agree with Jim's point of discrimnination.  In my opinion, 
$3000 may be a bit steep, especially in comparison with the fine for 
deer-poachin.  On the other hand, however, I do not think the latter 
should "get off" that easily.  I look at it like this: if we collect a 
cabbage white or Martin's swallowtail in the eastern Mojave Desert (a 
large part of it is now National Park territory) and get fined $3000, 
then the deer poacher should get slapped with a $10000-15000 fine, not a 
dirty look and a pat on the wrist.  Maybe I am looking at it the wrong 
way, but I think only the NRA would disagree with me.

-- 
Pierre Plauzoles   [email-masked]
Canoga Park, California

---

From: Bill Terrill <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 31 Mar 95 20:45:40 -0500

IMHO, all poachers should be given the exact same sentence. There is no excuse
for poaching. Fish, wildlife, insects and plants need all of the protection we
can summon. Poaching is poaching and if it is not curtailed with strong, equal
enforcement of the law, eventually there will be nothing left to protect.
 I saw a television special a couple of years ago about animal poachers. The
amount of animals that one poacher took in 6 months was equal to the take of
150 legitimate hunters over a two year span. This earth can not stand this
level of depletion. BTW, these poachers were in the American west not Africa
or someplace with exotic animals such as Elephants, zebras, apes, etc.
 $10,000 plus 5 years jail plus confiscation of all property directly connected
to the poaching operation sound like a good starting point to me. And no plea
bargaining.

---

From: [email-masked] (Samuel Sun)
Date: 3 Apr 1995 05:51:15 GMT

> enforcement of the law, eventually there will be nothing left to protect.

While poaching should in all rights be looked down upon, what I feel is
being overlooked is the effect of collecting/poaching on a particular
population.  

> level of depletion. BTW, these poachers were in the American west not Africa

True, true, but...  Person A walks into Yellowstone and poaches two bears.
Person B walks into Yellowstone and collects two Parnassians (type of
butterfly).  While both have broken the law etc. etc., I find more cause to
question the intent of the law in the latter case than the former.  Simply
put, bears (and vertebrates in general) do not propagate the same way as
most insects do.  Shoot 10 bears a year in Yellowstone, and collect 10
parnassians, and I'll bet you millions that the bears will be the first to
go.  The two animals are treated equally by the law, but are not treated
equally by nature.  As I mentioned before in this group, controlled
collecting of some flora or fauna can be more beneficial in the long run
than slapping "do not touch" signs on everything in a park.  Collection of
insects is currently permitted only for institutional research, by
definition restricted as to intent in purpose.  It is rare to have the
Smithsonian Institution go somewhere and ask for a permit to collect any
Lepidoptera seen to establish a life list.  While life lists may have been
established, who can say that something new doesn't exist out there?  There
are many secluded areas in our nation's parks - places that researchers may
not target, but your everyday, average, "amateur" collector might, and
establish a new find.

  Just as one example, the Lepidopterist's Society publishes collecting  
summaries each year, for new county records, early appearances, and such.
How many of these new records are logged by "institutional researchers" as
opposed to everyday collectors?  Just because a collector doesn't have
institutional backing doesn't mean he/she can't contribute to scientific
knowledge.  But, go apply for a permit at a national park and see what they
say..  Good luck.  Returning to my original idea, insects, butterflies, are
in general more plentiful than the fauna for which FWS regulations were
designed.  Their populations are more difficult to over collect, and the
relative importance of a given number of individuals is much less important
to the survival of the species.  With all this in mind, treating all
wildlife equally doesn't make sense.  As one other person mentioned,
regulations such as these breed discontent and encourage poaching.  This
then creates a black market in the items in question, causing the entire
intent of the legislation to become counterproductive.  

  So why don't we protect the mosquitoes in Mt McKinley National Park?  Are
  they somewhat lesser creatures because they hurt us?

Sam Sun

---

From: [email-masked] (Mark Isaak)
Date: Tue, 4 Apr 1995 17:35:50 GMT

In article <[email-masked]> Bill Terrill <[email-masked]> writes:
>IMHO, all poachers should be given the exact same sentence. There is no
>excuse for poaching. . . .  $10,000 plus 5 years jail plus confiscation of
>all property directly connected to the poaching operation sound like a good
>starting point to me.

You propose that I should be fined $10,000 and jailed for five years if I
take one mosquito from a National Park and put it in my collection.  What
should be my sentence if I slap a mosquito while I'm in a National Park?

>Fish, wildlife, insects and plants need all of the protection we
>can summon.

How do you expect conservation efforts to get any public support if you
repeat sentences like the above, which are just plain false?
-- 
Mark Isaak                "No one is so terribly deceived as he who
[email-masked]           does not himself suspect it." - Kierkegaard