Subject: Re: Here comes the TRUTH (fwd)

From: Gregory <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 6 Nov 1995 01:28:14 -0500

I continue to perceive an undercurrent in this whole discussion and that is
a perception that some folks are putting butterflies (Mr. Kral called 'em
"bugs" in one posting) on a different, and lower, level of importance.
Poachers who take a grizzly bear should be punished, but butterfly
collectors who "took" butterflies from a national park should not be.  I
certainly hope this is not the case. Butterflies, grizzlies, chinook salmon,
etc. -- they're all part of this continent's natural diversity. To put any
one on a lower level of importance is wrong.

Alan Gregory

>To Colin Law,
>
>Not repeating your response to my critique of Eric Weir's argument I
>posted earlier in consideration to save transmittal space important to
>some users, I have the follwoing reply.  Please carefully understand the
>definition of the word UNREFUTED as I explain the following.  Yes it is
>theoretically possible to extirpate any finite population, but does that
>mean that it is likely to occur in reality?  All life on earth can be
>instantly wiped out in a cataclysmic event but how likely is this to
>occur?  i simply state that absent of any PROOF to the contrary, an
>ascerted fact stated in a paper still stands.  Yes it is possible that
>overcollecting of insects does occur in a normal natural habitat, but
>nobody has proven it yet - so how is my arguement flawed?
>
>I do appreciate your direct approach to my arguement, but I do believe my
>assertions are stronger than yours at present.
>
>thank you,
>
>Tom
>
>
*************************************************************************
Gregory                 "Let us begin. Let us restore the Earth. Let the
Penn State Hazleton       mountains talk, and the rivers run.
Hazleton PA 18201              Once more  and forever."
Internet: [email-masked]                      - David Brower
(717) 450-3188
PO Box 571
Conyngham PA 18219

---

From: Dave Chesmore <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 7 Nov 1995 08:17:14 +000

I am incensed that what started out being an attempt to inform people
about the US laws pertaining to insect collecting (Kral) has now
become so personal (Eric Weir).  I for one am interested and
concerned about laws that appear to be so strict but few people
understand.

It is time to be objective about all of this and, as
professionally-minded people, stop attacking each other.

What I would like to see on Leps-L are outlines of the laws we are
hearing about.  Perhaps Tom Kral could provide these?

---

From: Ian Harvey <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 7 Nov 1995 14:22:28 GMT

[snip]

>hearing about.  Perhaps Tom Kral could provide these?

May I add my support to Dave Chesmore's comments.  I'm fed up with the
argument between Kral and various others, but I *am* interested in the
nature of the laws that he broke, the implications they have for both
amateur and professional entomologists, and the (seemingly impossible)
requirements for documenting large colletions made abroad.

Could someone please give an account of the laws: then we could debate the
extent to which they are 'reasonable'.

Cheers

Ian

******************************************************************************
Ian Harvey                                             Tel: +151 794 5028

Population Biology Research Group                      Fax: +151 794 5094
Department of Environmental and Evolutionary Biology
The University of Liverpool                            email:[email-masked]
PO Box 147, Liverpool L69 3BX, UK
******************************************************************************