HI David, you can ask a museum for your butterflies or other researchers with a collection. Is that enough for your studies? Cheers, Nadine

In general, yes. It seems more a rule than an exception that what we have so far perceived as one species, proves to be something more complicated, for instance, a group of cryptic (or so far, for a reason or another unrecognized) species, or vice versa, i.e. the status of 'species' or 'subspecies' cannot be justified by any credible criteria.. Without focused sampling these case would remain undetected, which would do real harm, by either over- or under-estimating the real status, including levels of threats, for each population or taxon as defined by improved knowledge. Without sampling the knowledge cannot be improved, and nobody wins. Certainly, if a population seems very sparse, any unncessary and destructive collecting should be strictly considered and restricted, or planned so that it will not harm the population's survival in any way. In general, collecting few species for scientific purposes is one of the least concerns regarding survival of species; habitat loss is the matter to be addressed.

If warranted, a butterfly collection allows you to assess the morphological variation of some local species. Certainly there are specimens in museums to see, but if you're working on evolutionary processes have individuals require to assess genetic variations morphometric. I think if warranted a local collection of individuals.

Hi Jon, thanks a lot pointing out my confusion of words in the sentence

" In general, collecting few species for scientific purposes is one of the least concerns regarding survival of species; habitat loss is the matter to be addressed" (I assume that when he says "few species", he had meant to type "few specimens", and will proceed on that assumption). But depending on which species you are talking about, his operative words might be either "in general", or "few specimens". "

I meant indeed "specimens", and also had in mind, but did not quite well express that the empahsis was more on "in general", meaning that there are exceptions, obviously numerous. I need not elaborate that further as Jon does it so well. Thanks!

Jon stated above that "There is no doubt that some species in some places at various times have indeed been "collected" to extinction ... "

One often hears this sort of argument, but I think there is little evidence to actually support that the CAUSE of any butterfly extinction is over-collection, and I would like to see specific cases cited before such assertions are made.

Of course rare species with limited distributions should be protected, and anyone who collects insects should be ethical. The Lepidopterists' Society has a pretty good statement on this: http://www.lepsoc.org/statement_on_collecting.php

Another point to bear in mind is that the impact of collectors on butterfly populations is dwarfed by the impact of other kinds of human activity. An interesting study by McKenna et al. (McKenna, D. M., K. M. McKenna, S. B. Malcolm and M. R. Berenbaum. 2001. Mortality of Lepidoptera along roadways in central Illinois. J. Lepid. Soc. 55: 63-68.) found that more butterflies were killed by cars in Illinois in a single season than are present in the collections of major public institutions like the Smithsonian.

No doubt for taxonomy or for behavioral studies collection is must..but otherwise shooting by camera is the best method to assess/ study butterflies

Problem of insects preservation discussed in Russia during

half a century. Modern form of Red List is not suitable for its decision.

Under extinction all over the World now not separate species,

but the hole entomological complexes! But for scientists there is only

one way to understand the situation in the local "hot spots"="entomological

refuges" - the monitoring investigations. I do not know, how to do this

with camera (as Arvinder Singh offer), if to work with hundreds species

of Noctuioidea moths!

Yes, Jon! In every region there are a number of particular problems with corrupted ecological linking. About pollinators I know very well that in USA artificial stimulation of Megachila rotundata reproduction (just for pollination of alfalfa) caused the extinction of solitary bees in agrolandscapes. Complex of 30-50 species of solitary bees - is entomological complex too. I guess, that the something similar You have in fynbos...

Dear Jon. Your anxiety I can understand very well! I am lepidopterologist, but worked with wasps and bees too. There was the similar problem with "dispollination" in the south of Russia. On the fields of alfalfa for seeds work about 20-30 local species of solitary bees. They are good natural pollinators of alfalfa. And there are a lot of them even in agrolandscape. But if the beekeepers come with beehives on trailers, pollination of alfalfa terminated! Home bees have a long tongues, which reaches the nectar, when bee's had outside the flower. So, the pollen does not cover the bees hairs. But after them the small solitary bees feeling the absence of nectar and no not visit this flowers. So, agronomists said: "What is the worst pest of seeds-alfalfa? The

HOME BEES indeed!"

Dear Jon! All concerning the bees I wrote in past perfect. Things changes quickly. There is a depression in alfalfa seeds production now in Russia. So, there is no way for alfalfa selection to breed a big flowers for home bees... However, don't You think, that during discussion of the "bees problems" we corrupted the original topic: "declining if butterflies populations"? Colleagues do not join us!

Habitat destruction, pesticides, climatic change are the threats. Collections are absolutely necessary to science.