[PCA] The monarch massacre: Nearly a billion butterflies have vanished

Thu Feb 19 15:13:47 CST 2015

I’m delighted to see this comment that in addition to the obvious life cycle plants for larvae…we should also keep in mind that successful migration and survival in Mexico is also dependent on the fall flowering plants along the migration route for food plants.  Most body fat stored that supports winter survival comes from the food plants available in the lower migration areas.  Drought and land management (weed treatments, loss of native vegetation with food plants for adults, etc) are also key factors.  Native plant habitat conversion statistics in these flyways, urbanization statistics, degree of native food plant use in revegation projects and reveg seed mixes (or not), etc. could be important information to share with the USFWS.  This comparative observation and others about the level of use of migrating adults  on fall wildflowers is valuable.

Fears about school programs, and educational work should not be much of a concern—unless these activities are shown to be harmful, and then likely modifications could be developed that would be effective.  The FWS can accommodate a lot by permit or programmatic consultation at the national level, and would likely do so for educational and awareness raising activities that contribute to public engagement and support for recovery.

Instead we should be considering the value of this information gathering effort and working to make it as broad as possible either in information submitted or requested to be examined—It can only be helpful to conduct a  national information synthesis about species status and habitat status.  This  national call for information gathering on issues of significant importance to species survival, and the clarification and new information that might be developed (regardless of the final listing decision) is important regardless.    There will be several opportunities going forward if listing appears warranted---more information gathering, and also if there is a proposed rule published there would be a written public comment period and public hearings to comment on balancing /examining the potential benefits of a potential listing.  There are good things ESA listing accomplishes, its not all about regulation. They would have to develop a national formal recovery plan and program, identifying information gaps and priority actions,  potential funding for research needed into harmful and helpful intervention recovery practices, and public education and engagement.  All these concerns expressed so far, and ideas for how they might be positively addressed would be very useful and helpful then in structuring the recovery program.

From: native-plants [mailto:native-plants-bounces at lists.plantconservation.org] On Behalf Of Hope Leeson
Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2015 9:50 AM
To: Smith, Catherine
Cc: native-plants at lists.plantconservation.org
Subject: Re: [PCA] The monarch massacre: Nearly a billion butterflies have vanished

One biotic element that I wish was being discussed more in conversations regarding monarch decline is the potentially negative effect that Cynanchum louisea and Cynanchum rossicum (black, and pale, swallow-wort) are having on monarch larvae (and also the potentially alleopathic effects on native milkweed species). Both are vines, native to Eastern Europe that are now widespread throughout the United States. The genus Cynanchum (syn. Vincetoxicum) is classified within the milkweed family, and is apparently chemically recognized as a 'milkweed' by the adult egg-laying females. Larvae hatching out on swallow-wort cannot survive and develop into adults due to the chemical composition of the leaves, and so die.

See the following articles for more information:
http://ee.oxfordjournals.org/content/36/3/631
http://monarchjointventure.org/images/uploads/documents/Swallow-wort_flyer.pdf

Black swallow-wort covers extensive areas of coastal Rhode Island, and is becoming increasingly dominant in un-managed, or minimally managed old field habitat. In the (not too distant) past, coastal areas served as massive staging and feeding areas for fall migration largely due to the presence of seaside goldenrod (Solidago sempervirens) and the male flowers of groundsel tree (Baccharis halimifolia), on which the adults nectar. It was common to be surrounded by 'clouds' of monarchs. In 2013 and 2014, a lucky observer might have seen as many as six at one time.

On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 6:14 PM, Smith, Catherine <SMITHCATH at ecu.edu<mailto:SMITHCATH at ecu.edu>> wrote:
Right, it's not voting.  It's commenting publicly on proposed administrative action, a petition in this case.  Agree (after reading the call for comment at Regulations.gov for docket # FWS-R3-ES-2014-0056) that specific kinds of comment are wanted, not general argument.   Still, it's an open call, not limited only to scientific or commercial responses.  You could help by telling us what kinds of commentary will best serve the purpose, in your opinion.  Suggestions?

Thanks,
Catherine Smith

From: Addsum-Tony Frates [afrates at addsuminc.com<mailto:afrates at addsuminc.com>]
Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2015 2:54 PM
To: Smith, Catherine
Cc: John barr; native-plants at lists.plantconservation.org<mailto:native-plants at lists.plantconservation.org>
Subject: Re: [PCA] The monarch massacre: Nearly a billion butterflies have      vanished

It should be more clearly noted however that this isn't a "voting"
process; this isn't American Idol.

The FWS has already decided to review this under a 90-day finding.
Nothing is going to be pulled back at this point, and the comments
they are seeking are scientific and commercial data relating to the
status of the North American Monarch subspecies* for the 12-month
finding that they are going to be working on.

All of these comments opposing or supporting listing are really
largely inapplicable and misdirected at this time.

Tony Frates

*The other comment mentioning the species as a whole not being in
danger of exinction misses the point that this is a petition to list
Danaus plexippus plexippus and not every/all subspecies of Monarchs,
and they are different; and also that a threatened status under the
ESA would refer to a taxon that is in danger of becoming extinct.

Quoting "Smith, Catherine" <SMITHCATH at ecu.edu<mailto:SMITHCATH at ecu.edu>>:

> Thank you, John Barr, for helpful information and perspective that
> can inform responses to the call for public comments at
> Regulations.gov (docket # FWS-R3-ES-2014-0056).  Comments can be
> submitted until March 2.  To date, only 309 comments have been
> submitted.  That's a very low number.  If many of the comments take
> the same position, the result will be a skewed, unrepresentative
> sample.  In contrast, EPA's recent call for comments on proposed
> redefinition of 'waters of the US' under the Clean Water Act
> received 900,000 comments.
>
> I hope many on this list will find time to submit a comment. If
> you're pressed for time, you can use information and ideas generated
>  by this discussion to craft your response.  Again, deadline is
> March  2.
>
> Comments can make a difference, as agencies can and do pull back
> proposed regulation for revision based on comments received.  Any
> well-conceived, supported comment is welcome.  All comments are
> read, categorized, and the categories are summarized by contract
> specialists for consideration by the proposing agency.
>
> Catherine F. Smith
> Spring Mills PA
> Professor Emeritus, English/Professional and Technical
> Communication, East Carolina University
> author, Writing Public Policy: A Practical Guide to Communicating in
>  the Policymaking Process (Oxford UP, 4th ed forthcoming 2015)
>
>
> ________________________________________
> From: native-plants
> [native-plants-bounces at lists.plantconservation.org<mailto:native-plants-bounces at lists.plantconservation.org>] on behalf of
> John barr [john at nativecottagegardens.com<mailto:john at nativecottagegardens.com>]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2015 11:40 AM
> To: native-plants at lists.plantconservation.org<mailto:native-plants at lists.plantconservation.org>
> Subject: [PCA] The monarch massacre: Nearly a billion butterflies
> have  vanished
>
> This is being debated in the Monarch community.
>
> 1. The Monarch Butterfly is not in danger of extinction.  It is
> firmly established as both a native and an invasive (ironic) in
> multiple locations around the world.
> 2.  The mass migration from the northern tiers of the US and Canada
> to Mexico and from the rockies to the California coast is the
> phenomena that is in danger of extinction.
>
> Biggest threat: GMO corn, soy, and alfalfa.
> Other threats:  Climate change,  habitat loss due to development in
> the US and logging in Mexico, butterfly farming and releases,
> increased disease (OE) and parasites caused by year round breeding
> on non-native milkweed (A. curassavica).
>
> Pro:  Publicity and awareness leading to efforts (public and
> private) and funding (public and private) the head off listing.
> Possible changing ethanol mandate (some estimates that 40% of GMO
> corn goes to ethanol).  Possible changes to Conservation Reserve
> Program (lots of marginal lands moved to GMO corn to feed the
> ethanol mandate).  Climate change threats brought home with an
> iconic insect, could reinforce efforts at halting and reversing.
>
> Con:  GMO and ethanol industries are politically powerful and rich.
>  Anything they perceive as a threat is going to get squashed, to the
>  best of their ability.
> The listing singles out butterfly farmers and releases, these folks
> are directly threatened and vocal.
> Schools use monarchs raised in the classroom to give kids a hands on
>  experience with nature and insect development, this could be
> curtailed or eliminated.  (Most teachers do not collect the monarch
> eggs themselves from the wild, they purchase from Butterfly farms
> and Monarch Watch, so policing would be pretty easy, if FWS chose to
>  enforce.)
> “A Bridge Too Far”, because it the the migration not the insect that
>  would be listed, it is on somewhat uncharted territory, opponents
> of  the ESA could use this as a target.
> Monarch enthusiasts are often just that: MONARCH enthusiasts.  They
> are enamored with the Monarch butterfly first and the rest of the
> natural world not at all.  Hence, the buddlia and invasive milkweed
> planting.  They fear their handling of the monarch could be
> threatened.
>
> The most knowledgeable and public biologists in Monarchy are divided
>  into two camps: Sticks and carrots.  Some prefer to entice change
> with a carrot, some believe a stick is required.
>
> I always picture the carrot being held by a stick, so both seem necessary.
>
> john in austin
> _______________________________________________
> native-plants mailing list
> native-plants at lists.plantconservation.org<mailto:native-plants at lists.plantconservation.org>
> http://lists.plantconservation.org/mailman/listinfo/native-plants_lists.plantconservation.org
>
> Disclaimer
> Posts on this list reflect only the opinion of the individual who is
>  posting the message; they are not official opinions or positions of
>  the Plant Conservation Alliance.
>
> To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to
> native-plants-request at lists.plantconservation.org<mailto:native-plants-request at lists.plantconservation.org> with the word
> "unsubscribe" in the subject line.
>
> _______________________________________________
> native-plants mailing list
> native-plants at lists.plantconservation.org<mailto:native-plants at lists.plantconservation.org>
> http://lists.plantconservation.org/mailman/listinfo/native-plants_lists.plantconservation.org
>
> Disclaimer
> Posts on this list reflect only the opinion of the individual who is
>  posting the message; they are not official opinions or positions of
>  the Plant Conservation Alliance.
>
> To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to
> native-plants-request at lists.plantconservation.org<mailto:native-plants-request at lists.plantconservation.org> with the word
> "unsubscribe" in the subject line.
>

_______________________________________________
native-plants mailing list
native-plants at lists.plantconservation.org<mailto:native-plants at lists.plantconservation.org>
http://lists.plantconservation.org/mailman/listinfo/native-plants_lists.plantconservation.org

Disclaimer
Posts on this list reflect only the opinion of the individual who is posting the message; they are not official opinions or positions of the Plant Conservation Alliance.

To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to native-plants-request at lists.plantconservation.org<mailto:native-plants-request at lists.plantconservation.org> with the word "unsubscribe" in the subject line.

--
Hope Leeson, Botanist & Coordinator of the Rhody Native Initiative

“We know more about the movement of celestial bodies than about the soil underfoot.” Leonardo DaVinci
Contact Me:
Rhode Island Natural History Survey
PO Box 1858
Room 200, Ranger Hall
URI, Kingston, RI 02881

hleeson at rinhs.org<mailto:hleeson at rinhs.org>

(401) 874-5800 RINHS main number
(401) 874-5807 Rhody Native
(401) 862-8857 (cell)

Check It Out:
locally sourced  |  locally grown
rhodynative.org<http://rhodynative.org/>

Rhody Native on Facebook<http://www.facebook.com/#%21/pages/Rhody-Native/149774788425519>

This electronic message contains information generated by the USDA solely for the intended recipients. Any unauthorized interception of this message or the use or disclosure of the information it contains may violate the law and subject the violator to civil or criminal penalties. If you believe you have received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete the email immediately.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.plantconservation.org/pipermail/native-plants_lists.plantconservation.org/attachments/20150219/eef48c08/attachment.html>