Butterflies - A Very British Obsession

[NickB]

What I would worry about most is if an expert were releasing species without informing anybody, as an expert should know better than anybody the implications. I would be forced to conclude that such behaviour would amount to a giant 'vanity project'.

Surely, it may be that the "expert" in question has decided that overall, in terms of preserving species, his actions are more important than any "vanity project" others may be running which simply plots their decline?

[Matsukaze]

Forgot to mention that the idiot who managed to get the chytrid fungus established in the wild here ought to spend time behind bars, too.

[David M]

What I would worry about most is if an expert were releasing species without informing anybody, as an expert should know better than anybody the implications. I would be forced to conclude that such behaviour would amount to a giant 'vanity project'.

Surely, it may be that the "expert" in question has decided that overall, in terms of preserving species, his actions are more important than any "vanity project" others may be running which simply plots their decline?

What the "expert" decides is open to interpretation. It may be that s/he is dutifully attempting to increase the range of a species/reintroduce a species/replenish an existing population.

What I would be concerned about is the fact that anyone should feel so "expert" that they believe their actions are right no matter what.

[Lee Hurrell]

There are so many invasive exotic plant species taking over the undergrowth it is now a major problem. Indeed the SSSI is, in line with many, deteriorating. Why? Lack of resources and money. 400 acres of land with established woodland and wonderful meadowlands is now mostly covered in poor grade secondary growth.

Seth, it seems timely this was reported today on BBC news:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-12041943

Aside from all the theoretical postulations, one must consider that the breeding and releasing of lepidoptera has gone on for centuries and will probably always do so. Although relatively small in number, there ARE enthusiasts/experts who do this and there is precious little that can be done to stop them (I've done it myself as a teenager with Small Tortoiseshells)

David, I also bred Small Tortoiseshells when I was a lad. Apart from helping the local population a bit it went a long way to harbour the passion I have now.

Cheers

Lee

[millerd]

I too have regularly bred Small Tortoiseshells and Peacocks over the years, and in 2009, Painted Ladies. My children have always found it fascinating: the youngest took some Peacock caterpillars to school where despite much prodding and poking by his chums, they successfully became adults.

No harm in this, surely? With luck, a group of children with a bit more awareness of the natural world than many have these days.

Dave

[Neil Jones]

I too have regularly bred Small Tortoiseshells and Peacocks over the years, and in 2009, Painted Ladies. My children have always found it fascinating: the youngest took some Peacock caterpillars to school where despite much prodding and poking by his chums, they successfully became adults.

No harm in this, surely? With luck, a group of children with a bit more awareness of the natural world than many have these days.

Dave

Great! No harm at all. This how I started raising a few peacocks and small tortoiseshells. When I grew up I then started Butterfly Conservation's first activity in Wales. It is educational and fun. That is fine, but can I just correct one common misconception. You don't , except in exceptional circumstances, increase the population of a butterfly by releasing more of them. The size of the population is determined by the amount and quality of habitat available.

[Neil Jones]

What I would worry about most is if an expert were releasing species without informing anybody, as an expert should know better than anybody the implications. I would be forced to conclude that such behaviour would amount to a giant 'vanity project'.

Surely, it may be that the "expert" in question has decided that overall, in terms of preserving species, his actions are more important than any "vanity project" others may be running which simply plots their decline?

What the "expert" decides is open to interpretation. It may be that s/he is dutifully attempting to increase the range of a species/reintroduce a species/replenish an existing population.

What I would be concerned about is the fact that anyone should feel so "expert" that they believe their actions are right no matter what.

Precisely!

I also cannot believe that any true expert would believe that establishing an isolated colony of Marsh Fritillary in Lincolnshire is the way to do it. What the science clearly shows is that because of its ecology , this species requires to be conserved on a landscape scale with many colonies and habitat patches. Caroline Bulman's Phd thesis which is on this subject, correctly predicts the extinction in Cumbria and gives the Lincolnshire colony less than a 25% chance of surviving until 2020.
We know with the Marsh Fritillary that internationally there have been over 80 attempts of establishing colonies and not one single long-term success. The Cumbrian re-introduction was carried on on a landscape scale and they are trying to ensure that the habitat is properly managed.
What we don't know is whether the Lincolnshire colony is being regularly reinforced with more stock either.

[Lee Hurrell]

can I just correct one common misconception. You don't , except in exceptional circumstances, increase the population of a butterfly by releasing more of them. The size of the population is determined by the amount and quality of habitat available.

I would add availability of foodplant, (un)seasonal weather, parasite attacks and in some circumstances, the presence of necessary symbiotic partners such as ants to the list.

My little of bit of help referred to survival rate rather than population size.

Lee

[Hugh Middleton]

Could I just say how interesting and informative this thread is. Please keep the discussion going. Perhaps there will be no concensus but it is illuminating. I watch the Marsh Fritillaries in Lincs and the other year the Scotch Argus which 'turned up' there.
The ethical and scientific questions raised in this thread are worth pursuing if only to help some of us begin to develop a somewhat informed opinion.

Many thanks,

Hugh

[EricY]

The rare moth comment reminded me that many years ago when the A149 was clogged up back to Kings Lynn on any sunny day, a bypass was planned that cut between the end of Dersingham bog & the common. Someone raised the question of a moth there, that had no records since 1947. Villagers up in arms & several hundered got together to march on the road & stop the traffic on a bank holiday monday - we got our bypass & a good job too!

On the otherhand the same villages are now a butterfly desert due to development & the fad for gravel gardens/parking area. Very few bf's in my garden now when 10 years ago I had hundereds, even a clouded yellow one day. Personally as a lay man I have never heard of any butterfly other than the "cabbage white" doing any damage to the enviroment. Therefor cannot see that introductions will worry the general public, most will be quite pleased to see a strange butterfly. Next year I will be going to both Lindrick & Chambers wood & saving myself & the enviroment many miles in the process. Eric

[NickB]

......
What we don't know is whether the Lincolnshire colony is being regularly reinforced with more stock either.

It seems to be centred on Chambers Farm a Forestry Commission centre, which Lincs BC are involved with....does anyone up there know anything about this? It seems to be part of a wider Limewoods project.....
And I certainly don't think isolated introductions are a good thing either. We do need land-scape level management (for many species) else we end up with more butterfly zoos like this...
N

[David M]

David, I also bred Small Tortoiseshells when I was a lad. Apart from helping the local population a bit it went a long way to harbour the passion I have now.

Same here. I collected ST larvae purely because they were easy to find. Just think, I could have innocently done likewise with a threatened species that just happened to be common in my particular locality.

To read some of the comments on here, that would have made me an inadvertant criminal!

[NickB]

Let's be clear about this - breeding and releasing has always taken place on a small-scale and at a local level by enthusiasts.
There is no witch-hunt nor censure for those that do. Their motivations are driven by their passion for butterflies, the same reason we are all discussing things here.
What is in question is the long-term viability of introductions, their chances of survival by spreading and mixing with other colonies.
I think we are all agreed that country-side wide planning and re-creation of suitable corridors of habitat is the key as to whether introductions (official or not) into well-managed but isolated sites are worth pursuing and spending large resources on maintaining.

The scientist in me knows there is so much more to know, using data collected on the ground. If this data is corrupted by unknown introductions, it puts the outcomes at risk.
The realist in me may then think that once populations are this fragmented and small, it may be too late in the long run anyway whatever anyone does, so why not if it prolongs their survival for a few decades?
The romantic in me, on seeing for the first time the beauty of a rare re-introduced species, has every sympathy with the people responsible, whatever the tactics used......

I think I am one-third each

[David M]

Let's be clear about this - breeding and releasing has always taken place on a small-scale and at a local level by enthusiasts.
There is no witch-hunt nor censure for those that do. Their motivations are driven by their passion for butterflies, the same reason we are all discussing things here.
What is in question is the long-term viability of introductions, their chances of survival by spreading and mixing with other colonies.
I think we are all agreed that country-side wide planning and re-creation of suitable corridors of habitat is the key as to whether introductions (official or not) into well-managed but isolated sites are worth pursuing and spending large resources on maintaining.

The scientist in me knows there is so much more to know, using data collected on the ground. If this data is corrupted by unknown introductions, it puts the outcomes at risk.
The realist in me may then think that once populations are this fragmented and small, it may be too late in the long run anyway whatever anyone does, so why not if it prolongs their survival for a few decades?
The romantic in me, on seeing for the first time the beauty of a rare re-introduced species, has every sympathy with the people responsible, whatever the tactics used......

I think I am one-third each

Good, rational post there, Nick.

Corruption is a good word, since it describes very aptly the impact on scientific research if people go around anonymously releasing captive bred stock. If they don't inform anybody, then no-one knows for sure whether the sudden appearance of a species or explosive increase is as a result of natural causes.

Essentially I'm a romantic at heart. Whilst I accept this sort of thing is probably causing more damage than good, if I DID happen to see a couple of Large Tortoiseshells in a Monmouthshire wood or a handful of Marbled Fritillaries near the south coast of England, I'd feel excited and uplifted in equal measure rather than angry due to the 95% certainty that such sightings were born out of an individual's desire to artificially alter the natural balance.

[Matsukaze]

I went to Finemere Wood and saw the Marbled Fritillary this year. I suppose it has to be one of life's guilty pleasures, as the fritillary was enjoyable to watch. It is a butterfly with character - a pugnacious, possibly somewhat psychotic one. It went charging up and down the main ride, attempting to pick fights with anything orange (this was World Cup final day), usually satyrids, but also Silver-washed Fritillary and, repeatedly, a Brown Hawker - possibly not a wise move. The butterfly was impossible to photograph as it almost never stopped, briefly alighting on one particular bramble flower a couple of times. I then staked out the flower awaiting its return, which it refused to do for at least half an hour.

Finemere is warmly recommended - this was my best day's butterfly-watching of the year. On arrival I found the Emperor on the ground, drinking some substance I did not care to identify. For a long while he sat there oblivious to my presence, before finally spiralling around my head and ascending into the canopy. Later, the same Emperor or another took exception to a pair of Speckled Woods which had been spiralling half the length of the main ride already, and darted out to attack them - only to be utterly ignored by the Speckled Woods, which continued their combat for at least another hundred yards. The general abundance of insects, particularly along the main ride and in the trench, was a joy to observe.

[Paul Wetton]

It's OK assuming that small scale introductions do no harm and they probably don't when they do not come into contact with any other populations but what if foreign races are allowed to breed with a race that is endemic to the British Isles. It is quite possible and alarming to me that the British race or sub species may be lost entirely due to breeding out from foreign genes.
Worse still with frequent introductions the gene pool may become so affected that the population may not be able to cope with the British climate or habitat requirements. This is obviously a "worst-case" and fairly unlikely but could happen. This is why in my opinion individuals should not be allowed to act selfishly on their own and as someone mentioned much wider contry wide management of such projects should be considered.
Is this not a worry?

[NickB]

Is this not a worry?

I do think introductions of non-UK species are worrying and lack respect for the creatures being released, given their limited long-term prospects of survival....and as someone pointed out earlier, are illegal!

[Rogerdodge]

Great discussion.
It is so good that, despite some pretty varied viewpoints there has been no name calling or the throwing of toys from the pram.
I can't think of many sites where someone or other wouldn't be on the verge of a site ban by now.

A testament to the quality of the people that contribute to this site.

I think my main issue with the whole matter of introductions/re-introductions is that, because it has to be carried out clandestinely, we don't know (from a scientific viewpoint) what is going on.
Some posts back it was stated that re-introductions almost never work. However, perhaps some of Mr White's have worked. If so, the fact that he HAS to keep his information secret is depriving "official" sources of methodologies that may enable their introductions to thrive?.
I take great pleasure every spring in visiting the Glanvilles at Sand Point. They are a real delight, and it is always a highlight of my year.
Now, they were an introduction many years ago. They disappeared for a few years, and have now reappeared.
This poses so many questions.
Did they really die out after the first introduction or survive in very low numbers?
Was the first introduction really a success, or was it bolstered each year with fresh stock?
Is the present population being bolstered? or is it self sustaining?.
Is it worth anyone studying this population? Because, if it is working it could hold important information. If it is being bolstered, then any study would be worthless.

I, amongst just about every member of this site, would love to see the landscape scale management of habitat for wildlife. Sadly this is never going to happen. The greed of the moneymen, ignorance of the general public, and the hypocrisy of the knowledgeable (that means you and me - "enjoying" cheap food that damages the environment - putting gallons of ecologically expensive petrol in our cars just to go and see butterflies – etc. etc) ensure that our planet will continue to lose habitat at the accelerated rate it is.

So - sure - let’s allow these unofficial re-introductions. Let's create areas with artificial populations of butterflies.
The release of some European Marsh Frits in some meadow somewhere will probably do less damage to the environment than you will cause by driving there in your CO2 emitting car and taking photographs with your camera made with oil based plastics and metals ripped from the earth and eating your packed lunch with ingredients flown half way around the world and sold to you for 10p.

But, please can we find some way to share the introduction information, methodologies and data. This is essential as we will eventually HAVE to have these bolstered enclaves, mini zoos (nature reserves).

They took all the trees and put ‘em in a tree museum……………………

It’ll cost us more than a dollar and a half though!

[Jack Harrison]

Well argued Roger.

While searching came across this on ukb about the Map Butterfly (species section)

This species was deliberately introduced in 1912 when the butterfly became established in the Forest of Dean in Monmouthshire, and Symond’s Yat in Herefordshire. The well-known entomologist A.B. Farn was so opposed to the deliberate introduction of a foreign species that, in 1914, he deliberately collected and destroyed every individual he could find. However, the ultimate demise of the colonies is believed to be the result of additional (and unknown) factors.

I can't see any mention of another short-lived introduced colony (1980s/1990s as best I can recall) in a wood near Oxford, possibly Wytham Wood which is owned by the University.

Jack

[Paul Wetton]

I'm going to harp on about the effect of introductions on the genetics of a population. If foreign genes are introduced into a population of British butterflies you are potentially preventing the occurrence of speciation. There is a good chance that British races could develop into completely new species compared to their european cousins due to them being isolated for long periods of time. More so with smaller populations as the gene pool is smaller.

Thus two arguaments. If the gene pool becomes too small then introductions may be required to maintain the population along with habitat management etc. Introductions may not be from the same sub species or race as they may not be another similar population. In such circumstances I think that survival of an altered gene pool is preferable to loss of a species.

However, where the natural gene pool is large enough to maintain itself, then the introduction of foreign genes could adversely affect the genetics of the population and possible prevent speciation occurring over periods of time as a worst case.

Any thoughts?