[HN Gopher] Migratory monarch butterfly now endangered
___________________________________________________________________
Migratory monarch butterfly now endangered
Author : gmays
Score : 185 points
Date : 2022-07-22 15:02 UTC (7 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.iucn.org)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.iucn.org)
| nr2x wrote:
| The Sixth Extinction by Elizabeth Kolbert is required reading.
|
| We're in the midst of a very rare event, that we caused, are
| making worse, and we don't know what will ultimately happen.
| johnyzee wrote:
| I just read Flight Behavior, by Barbara Kingsolver, which has a
| plot with a backdrop of Monarch butterflies, their migration
| and the threats climate changes can pose to them. It's a great
| book, I recommend it.
| debacle wrote:
| If history is a guide, greed will win out and weak men will
| suffer at their own hands.
| ehnto wrote:
| We're really talking about humanity versus the ecosystem here
| though. If there is an ecological collapse, that would also
| mean societal collapse, and no one wins.
| pamelafox wrote:
| If any of you are in California and are interested in creating a
| habitat for Monarch caterpillars around your home, I highly
| recommend Narrow-leaf milkweed. It's one of the native milkweeds
| and its the favorite of my caterpillars (they hate Showy
| milkweed).
|
| You can find nurseries with Narrow-leaf here:
| https://calscape.org/nurseries.php?id=434&showmap=1
|
| Or you can grow from seed:
| https://larnerseeds.com/products/asclepias-fascicularis-narr...
|
| I do both, since you can never have enough milkweed!
|
| Here's a video of a Monarch butterfly recently flying for the
| first time after pupating on our Salvia:
| https://studio.youtube.com/video/edTgi7f1NlY/edit
| kshahkshah wrote:
| Will add, if you're buying from a nursery, make sure the grower
| they source from use neonicotinoids free soil.
|
| I've been visited by so so many different butterflies this
| year. I'm in Zone 6B, central NJ. I planted asclepias tuberosa
| (mexican milkweed, orange flowers, medium height), lots of
| agastache, eupatorium (little joe pyeweed), and monarda. Highly
| recommend doing some research on natives.
| quercusa wrote:
| Darn rabbits got my _tuberosa_. If you don 't have Mountain
| Mint[0] ( _Pycnanthemum muticum_ ) it drives all the non-
| butterfly pollinators nuts. I'm hoping to find some Winged
| Sumac[1] as it's also a big draw.
|
| [0] https://njaes.rutgers.edu/plant-of-the-
| month/pycnanthemum.ph...
|
| [1]
| https://www.wildflower.org/plants/result.php?id_plant=RHCO
| kshahkshah wrote:
| I didn't know about mountain mint, this is a fabulous
| recommendation. Thank you!
| pamelafox wrote:
| Ah yes, good point, apparently some of the local nurseries
| have sprayed their milkweeds with some sort of pesticide,
| which means you have to keep caterpillars off them for a
| year. If you go to a nursery that specializes in natives,
| that's usually not an issue. In bay area, my favorite
| nurseries are Watershed and Oaktown Native, and they don't
| spray.
|
| We've actually had a ton of swallowtails this year, which
| I'll admit are all over my non-native dill. I intend to plant
| Yampah one of these days, since that's the native version of
| dill.
| 14 wrote:
| I just bought these ones I didn't realize there was a specific
| species they prefer are these ones okay?
| https://www.amazon.ca/Caribou-Seed-Company-Butterflies-Germi...
| pamelafox wrote:
| Hm, so it seems like that milkweed does have a distribution
| in California, but is not one of the native ones.
| https://www.calflora.org/app/taxon?crn=9705 says it's not
| native, and Calscape doesn't list it at all. If you're in
| California, I'd highly recommend getting the narrow-leaf
| instead, if you don't mind spending a little more money.
| Also, if you can, plant some native Salvia nearby for them to
| pupate on. Salvia Clevandii does quite well. They'll also
| pupate on arbors, trellises, fences, etc.
| [deleted]
| angst_ridden wrote:
| Interesting. In my area (Southern California), the Monarchs
| seem to really prefer the Tropical (Asclepias curassavica). We
| plante it when a local Monarch enthusiast recommended it. Now
| that we're more educated, we've been gradually getting rid of
| it.
| pamelafox wrote:
| Ah, I never even attempted the tropical since it's not
| native, so I don't know how ravenous they'd be for it. I just
| contrast narrow-leaf to showy since those are the two
| commonly sold native CA milkweeds, and my caterpillars are
| just so incredibly not into the showy, it might as well not
| be milkweed.
| angst_ridden wrote:
| We were pretty ignorant when we started our Monarch garden.
| It was 20 years ago, and there was less readily-available
| information.
| pamelafox wrote:
| Yeah, to be fair, I'm in that situation with swallowtails
| right now. I planted non-native dill, and it's swamped
| with happy swallowtails, as I didn't know about the
| native Yampah. Hope to replace the dill with yampah next
| year. Until then, the swallowtails shall have a dill
| buffet.
| eklitzke wrote:
| Working YouTube URL:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=edTgi7f1NlY
| immmmmm wrote:
| I read Ceballos the other day, a brilliant conservation biologist
| talking often of the 6th mass extinction, saying in an informal
| context that homo sapiens would not survive it.
|
| I know that kind of science, i have read thousands of articles
| these last years. I love dystopian Sci-Fi too.
|
| I think it's a special moment when you see the experts discussing
| the possible extinction of your own species, and that every
| dataset, every model, points a bit more towards it.
|
| And i see climatologists, Mann included, saying climate impacts
| are coming _decades in advance_.
|
| What a time to be "alive".
| mmazing wrote:
| I let local native milkweed grow wild on my land, specifically
| for Monarchs. I saw at least 3 this morning (unlikely to be
| migratory, I suppose?)
|
| Hopefully my property can be a stop for some of the migratory
| species!
| carbadtraingood wrote:
| The way we treat the destruction of species and habitat at our
| hands as a necessary side effect of progress is alarming.
|
| Removing a species from the planet is like removing a screw from
| an airplane in flight - you can probably remove a lot of screws
| before there's a problem, but you will eventually crash
| catastrophically if you keep at it.
| eljimmy wrote:
| I think we as a species must rid ourselves of selfishness and
| greed. We need to think beyond the timelines of our own
| existence.
|
| Alas, I fear those traits may be too deeply rooted in our our
| own nature and nurture that our demise may be inevitable.
| PuppyTailWags wrote:
| I want to push against the narrative that selfishness and
| greed is inherent. The currently dominant society might
| socialize its people to prioritize selfishness and greed but
| not all societies do and not all societies must.
| JKCalhoun wrote:
| To be a contrarian, perhaps the societies that prioritize
| selfishness end up dominating as a result.
|
| I act with optimism, teach optimism to my children. When
| left to my inner thoughts however I worry about the future
| of our species.
| angst_ridden wrote:
| Dominating? In the way a bacteria dominates a petrie dish
| until it exhausts all the resources and dies off?
| JKCalhoun wrote:
| Exactly.
| bmitc wrote:
| Selfishness and greed is at the heart of humanity. Just
| look at every lawn covering every plot of land. They are
| examples of pure greed. Almost no one uses parts of their
| lawn regularly, and so they only exist for vanity purposes.
|
| There is a reason why many restoration and native plant
| proponents teach about empathy. One needs to gain empathy
| for plant and wildlife struggle before being able to enact
| change.
|
| We could solve a lot of problems almost immediately if we
| had even a modicum amount of collective empathy.
| downboots wrote:
| It means mostly anyone can help contributing by
| converting part of that lawn
|
| Native species make the most sense but there are plenty
| of other beneficial weeds
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beneficial_weed
|
| Like a victory garden, but war of a different _nature_
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victory_garden
| [deleted]
| zmgsabst wrote:
| Species disappear all the time.
|
| The issue, in so much as there is one, is the speed at which
| that change is happening.
| carbadtraingood wrote:
| Note I specifically said "at our hands" to suggest exactly
| this. Nature gonna nature, agreed. What we're doing is
| different.
| nemo44x wrote:
| Aren't we nature too? Isn't every species of living thing
| trying to thrive as much as possible in a ceaseless
| competition for space and resources?
|
| Are we the shepards of the world or just another organic
| life?
| carbadtraingood wrote:
| No. We were nature, but we're progressing faster than
| natural processes can adapt.
| melling wrote:
| World population in 1980: 4.4 billion
|
| World population today: 8.0 billion
|
| ...
|
| We need more land, houses, cars, energy, ...
|
| overfishing: https://www.worldwildlife.org/threats/overfishing
|
| Need to burn down the rainforests for cattle:
|
| https://wwf.panda.org/discover/knowledge_hub/where_we_work/a...
|
| Electricity generation with fossil fuels looks like it tripled:
|
| https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/charts/world-electri...
| mistrial9 wrote:
| the vast majority of the population growth is in places that
| have never seen this species; overly-general advice is not
| going to solve this particular problem
| melling wrote:
| Strange, the article specifically mentions urban development.
| Where is the disconnect?
|
| "by between 22% and 72% over the past decade. Legal and
| illegal logging and deforestation to make space for
| agriculture and urban development has already destroyed
| substantial areas of the butterflies' winter shelter in
| Mexico and California, while pesticides and herbicides used
| in intensive agriculture across the range kill butterflies
| and milkweed, the host plant that the larvae of the monarch
| butterfly feed on."
|
| The population of Mexico has doubled since 1980 and the US
| has gone from 227 million to 340 million people
| [deleted]
| carbadtraingood wrote:
| "Need". We don't need to do those things. We choose to do those
| things.
| melling wrote:
| Keep telling yourself that right up until all the damage is
| permanent.
|
| "If only the people in the Amazon chose not to burn down the
| forest for cattle"
|
| "If only China and India didn't burn so much coal"
|
| "If only people didn't eat so much fish"
|
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_commons
| carbadtraingood wrote:
| What? I'm not sure what you are saying... We don't need to
| eat beef, both here and in Brazil. We choose to, in both
| places. We, locally, need to regulate harder and push
| harder globally to protect things.
| melling wrote:
| I'm saying that "If only we didn't eat beef" is not a
| workable solution.
|
| What's important is that people realize they are
| proposing solutions that sound good but are not helpful.
|
| Half the Amazon will be torched before you realize this?
| nerdponx wrote:
| Meanwhile people wring their hands and fret over declining
| population _growth_ , because of the short-term effects it will
| have (on the order of a couple of decades). Seems incredibly
| short-sighted to me.
|
| I see no reason why we should specifically pursue growth,
| rather than a stable population. Short-term population
| _decrease_ would even be a good thing, as the older and larger
| generations eventually pass on and their children and
| grandchildren have fewer children of their own.
| trgn wrote:
| I think it's less about population growth and more about
| habitat destruction. One does not imply the other. Town
| living instead of suburbs, more pollinator gardens. That
| already will make a huge difference.
| melling wrote:
| More than half the world lives in urban areas.l, which is
| an increase
|
| https://ourworldindata.org/urbanization
|
| "More than half of the world's population now live in urban
| areas -- increasingly in highly-dense cities. However,
| urban settings are a relatively new phenomenon in human
| history. This transition has transformed the way we live,
| work, travel and build networks."
| nerdponx wrote:
| I don't know. How much habitat has been destroyed for
| farming, resource extraction, and other industrial purposes
| like waste storage?
| 14 wrote:
| I feel bad that as a kid we had a neighbor that would pay us to
| collect them so she could have them close up and paint pictures
| of them. We didn't kill that many but definitely killed a few. I
| just went on Amazon and bought a pack of milkweed seeds to plant
| in my yard to make up for that mistake as a kid. I have seen
| quite a few of them flying around this year. Hope to see them
| bounce back.
| pastor_bob wrote:
| I see these in Brooklyn, and I'm always amazed that they (and
| other butterflies) can get here. They must go over stretches
| dozens of miles long without any food or water.
| sk8terboi wrote:
| Not here in the north, they're all over!
| angst_ridden wrote:
| I think history (if there is any) will judge harshly the decision
| to allow the use of neonicotinids.
|
| In addition to general habitat destruction, the indisciminate
| obliteration of insect populations is going to bite humanity on
| the ass in ways we can't even imagine yet.
| philliphaydon wrote:
| Are these the same type of Monarch butterlies found in NZ?
|
| https://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/127540958/new-zealands-m...
| dkasper wrote:
| Yes
| chomp wrote:
| Copy+pasting my comment from another thread:
|
| For those wanting to plant milkweed: not all milkweed is a
| Monarch host. Of the known Monarch hosts, there is minimal
| documentation of which is the "best" for a Monarch. It's
| recommended that you pick a host native to your area. Page 93 on
| the following document[1] includes some species that are helpful
| to Monarch populations, broken down by area of the United States.
|
| For those who would like to purchase caterpillar stock to
| increase the local population, please reconsider. Bred Monarchs
| have a lack of genetic diversity that you are releasing in the
| wild, which can tip over populations due to poor genetics. There
| is research that shows that planting evergreen milkweed
| (encouraging sedentary behavior by removing the need to migrate),
| or releasing captive or reared monarchs, can allow unhealthy
| monarchs to survive and harm the population when they would not
| otherwise have survived migrations[2] Studies on bugs or and
| species have shown that animals can adapt to captive conditions
| in as short as one or two generations. When this happens,
| researchers wind up seeing alleles that are harmful to the wild
| population. [3] There is also the case to be made that by
| releasing abundant numbers, you are potentially creating food
| shortages that will harm even more butterflies.
|
| Plant local natives. Don't release into the wild.
|
| [1]
| http://www.xerces.org/sites/default/files/2018-05/17-031_02_...
|
| [2]
| https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rspb.2014.173...
|
| [3]
| https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1365-294X....
| angst_ridden wrote:
| There was a big trend to planting tropical milkweed (Asclepias
| curassavica) on the West Coast. Originally, it was considered a
| good thing. Now, because the plant's a perennial in this
| climate and is a good place for spreading OE spores, it's
| considered a bad thing.
|
| Some people advocate growing it because it's fast-growing,
| robust, and provides plentiful food. My understanding is that,
| if you do plant it, cut it well down in winter to prevent the
| spread of OE.
|
| In my own experience in California, the Monarchs really prefer
| to nectar and lay eggs on tropical rather than the native
| narrow-leaf milkweed (Asclepias fascicularis). We've been
| purging our garden of the tropical anyway.
|
| There are also some milkweed adjacent non-natives that they
| sort of like, e.g., Gomphocarpus physocarpus (aka Asclepias
| physocarpa). Again, my understanding is that the jury's out as
| to whether it's a good plant to have around for the Monarchs.
| It ceryainly is a striking plant that gets a lot of attention!
| chomp wrote:
| Yep, +1 to all of that. We have a combination of species
| planted (Texas), I don't really track which ones they favor.
| It makes it sort of easy to time cutting back the Tropical in
| that case, because when the others die back, you can cut back
| the tropical as well.
| sixothree wrote:
| Does dill grow well there or present any issues?
| angst_ridden wrote:
| I don't think dill presents any issues, but we haven't
| planted any.
|
| We have a lot of bronze fennel (which is non-native but
| heavily naturalized), and it's a host plant for the
| swallowtail butterflies. We get a lot of them too.
| [deleted]
| pvg wrote:
| https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...
| tmountain wrote:
| Is this the main species of monarch? I have them in my yard
| pretty regularly, but I also plant milkweed, their host plant to
| try and provide them with some habitat.
| dukeofdoom wrote:
| Milkweed is a very interesting looking plant. It's pretty and
| ornamental, Should be more popular in gardens. Especially in city
| gardens.
| mistrial9 wrote:
| seen this with my own eyes in my lifetime, here on the West Coast
| of California.. powerfully emotional if you have imprinted on it
| at a certain age; I suspect that the vast majority of people
| literally have more interest in the next five minutes than those
| flying things.. specialists are called for..
| de6u99er wrote:
| They'll say we had hot eeather in the past.
| downboots wrote:
| Our ability to simulate the world is in direct proportion to our
| ability to prevent existential risk.
| dkasper wrote:
| Very important to clarify this is only the migratory subspecies.
| The species as a whole is not endangered at all:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monarch_butterfly
| spankalee wrote:
| I can't believe how fast this is happening. I used to see
| millions of them, covering and almost dripping from trees like
| sap, in Santa Cruz.
| JKCalhoun wrote:
| Yep, took the daughters down the California coast near Pismo to
| see the migration -- maybe a decade or so ago. They covered the
| trees, ground.
|
| In the years following when we stopped by it was grim, so few
| of them.
| time_to_smile wrote:
| "'How did you go bankrupt?'
|
| Two ways.
|
| Gradually, then suddenly."
|
| -- Ernest Hemingway, _The Sun Also Rises_
| grapeskin wrote:
| > The western population is at greatest risk of extinction,
| having declined by an estimated 99.9%, from as many as 10 million
| to 1,914 butterflies between the 1980s and 2021.
|
| Insane. I wonder if recovery is even possible without devoted
| breeding efforts. A population this small could easily be wiped
| out by birds or a single storm.
| kvathupo wrote:
| Of particular worry, decreasing population entails decreasing
| gene pool (as I understand it). Thus, with a lack of sufficient
| genetic diversity in a small population, the species enters a
| mutation-motivated extinction vortex [1].
|
| Biology is a very existing field from the standpoint of
| mathematical formalism, which is lacking relative to the much
| older field of Physics. In this regard, I'm reminded of how the
| overly simple math of Mendelian inheritance motivated the bad
| policy of eugenics [2].
|
| I welcome any proper Biologists to correct my remarks. I have
| but passing interest!
|
| [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_erosion
|
| [2] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-Mendelian_inheritance
| frumper wrote:
| Not that the population is doing great, but last years numbers
| rebounded to about a quarter million. A 100x increase from the
| previous year.
|
| https://www.mercurynews.com/2022/01/26/western-monarch-butte...
| paiute wrote:
| I'm a big conservationist, but I'm so disillusioned by it
| these days. You're onto something here. We don't seem to have
| much data on their population size, but all the articles
| start from 1997 data when the population was at a peak. You
| go back a few years and the numbers are lower. This is a
| private organization and I don't see the criteria by which
| they mark a species endangered. They probably just make stuff
| up. Most creatures go through population cycles, and just
| quickly looking at the data going back to the early 90's it
| seems monarchs have huge boom and busts. A monarch lays up to
| 500 eggs in a week... so if you have a good year with lots of
| food and low predation and 100x increase it not hard to
| understand. It also not hard to anticipate huge declines the
| following season.
| lazyasciiart wrote:
| No, they probably don't just make stuff up. Why would you
| think that?
| gns24 wrote:
| The criteria by which they consider things endangered are
| here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endangered_species_(IUC
| N_statu...
| nabakin wrote:
| Makes me suspect that 2k estimate was very wrong
| quietbritishjim wrote:
| That suspicion is reinforced by the fact that the second
| estimate is strangely specific. 1,914? Not 1,915? Perhaps
| that number is from some survey or count that was meant for
| finding trends rather than estimating the total count.
| lazyasciiart wrote:
| I've visited known Monarch locations and the difference in
| actual visible butterflies in 2021 was astounding. I don't
| see any reason to think that estimate was wrong.
| throwaway5752 wrote:
| Or, looking at it the other way, the population is down 98%
| instead of 99.9%. It's really not that substantial of an
| error, and yours is a very "programmer talking about
| ecology" type of response. It's a terrible situation for
| the species and the outcome is largely the same -
| extinction within our lifetime - and you are quibbling
| about petty data concerns within the broader context.
| AlbertCory wrote:
| This argument kinda reminds me of this bit of sophistry
| (a nod to Ted Gioia for his "word of the year"):
|
| [Troper] X is up exponentially!
|
| [Engineer] Actually, it's only up 25%.
|
| [Troper] Whatever. You're minimizing the importance of X!
|
| So the sophistry is to make a ridiculous claim to get
| attention, and then when you're called on it, back away
| and say the number doesn't matter -- it's still
| important.
|
| In case it was ambiguous: yes, I did know the word, but
| no, it hasn't been used much lately, more's the pity.
| throwaway5752 wrote:
| In the context of a population over this range, a couple
| hundred thousand and a couple of thousand butterflies
| isn't as big a difference as you'd think, particularly
| over the time frame we're looking at (a few decades). I'd
| be surprised if they avoid extirpation (local extinction
| within a range) at this point - Western Monarches have
| habitat loss, terrible losses from pesticides, and now
| climate change really kicking in.
|
| To be pedantic, I don't think this is an example of
| sophistry. It may seem that way from your perspective,
| but I'd have to be in coordination with IUCN, which I'm
| not. I think in this case the logical fallacy would have
| to advanced by a single person or group. Also, perhaps
| since it's a relatively new word to you, you don't know
| it is considered insulting?
|
| To recap: IUCN made the claim about a population of
| 1,914/99.9 percent drop in population, which was mistaken
| (I found the source of the error from misinterpreted
| numbers from https://xerces.org/ further down, if you
| noticed). I made the separate claim that their error
| doesn't really matter, because both are almost equally
| dire and there is little difference between the level of
| urgency/intervention required to prevent functional
| extinction. I still stand by it.
| AlbertCory wrote:
| Perhaps you don't know it's considered insulting to say
| "Perhaps since it's a relatively new word to you" ?
|
| I've known the word "sophistry" for a long, long time,
| Throw. And I'll stack my erudition up against yours any
| time at all.
| [deleted]
| [deleted]
| nabakin wrote:
| > looking at it the other way, the population is down 98%
| instead of 99.9%. It's really not that substantial of an
| error
|
| An estimate that can easily confuse 2k with 250k is not
| an estimate to use. Now if a range was specified taking
| into account the variability, like 100k-2k, that would be
| much better. If the study did this, the article would be
| at fault for not being accurate.
|
| > yours is a very "programmer talking about ecology"
|
| I don't think I know everything, I simply commented on a
| niche forum about something I was curious. The vitriol is
| completely unwarranted.
|
| > It's a terrible situation for the species the outcome
| is largely the same - extinction within our lifetime -
| and you are quibbling about petty data concerns within
| the broader context.
|
| So what? Should I take all data on blind faith? Should I
| not question the validity of data when bullshit is so
| rampant? Stop the strawman, I never said I disagreed with
| the conclusion of the study, just that the single
| estimate was suspicious.
|
| Next time, if you actually know anything, aim to explain
| instead of attacking me. I can admit my mistakes and will
| be much more receptive.
| throwaway5752 wrote:
| I don't want to have a fight. We all know tone is tough
| and I didn't want to sounds as vitriolic as it came off
| to you. I can see how it did and I apologize to you.
|
| It seems obvious to me that this is a PR release, written
| by a non-scientist. They didn't offer citations, and it
| took me some digging to find the sourcing for the oddly
| specific figure: https://xerces.org/blog/fifth-annual-
| western-monarch-new-yea...
|
| _" Since 1997 volunteers have conducted counts of
| overwintering monarchs for the Xerces Society's annual
| Western Monarch Thanksgiving Count. As a way to better
| understand how the overwintering population changes
| throughout the winter, an additional count--the New
| Year's Count--was started in 2016. Now in its fifth year,
| the New Year's Count has given us a better understanding
| of: 1) how monarch numbers may decline at overwintering
| sites as the winter progresses; 2) how monarchs move
| between and within sites; 3) when they leave sites; and
| 4) the level of mortality that adult monarchs may be
| experiencing during the winter.
|
| Between December 26, 2020, and January 10, 2021,
| volunteers conducted surveys for the New Year's Count and
| tallied a total of 1,039 monarchs at 149 sites. These
| surveys followed the annual Western Monarch Thanksgiving
| Count, which is conducted annually for three weeks
| centered around the Thanksgiving holiday, and recently
| reported a mere 1,914 monarchs in total across 246 sites.
| At 77 sites, no monarchs were found during either the
| Thanksgiving or New Year's Count, at 15 sites monarch
| numbers increased between the Thanksgiving and New Year's
| counts, at 54 sites monarch numbers decreased, and at 3
| sites monarch numbers stayed the same. After the dismal
| numbers from the Thanksgiving Count, expectations for
| finding monarchs were low, but the news isn't all bad.
| For the sites counted during both the Thanksgiving Count
| and the New Year's Count, the decline in monarchs
| averaged 37%, which is lower than previous years
| (40-49%)."_
|
| This is not aimed at you, but it's a general complain: It
| is no fun to do OSS development any more because nobody
| wants to contribute or collaborate: they want to post a
| problem in an issue and have the maintainers solve their
| problem.
|
| Now aimed at you: I think there's a reasonable
| expectation of editorial competence from any content, and
| this probably didn't meet it, but I think we can all go
| the extra mile and read, learn, and understand before
| replying. Myself included.
| nabakin wrote:
| Appreciate the apology, sorry from my side as well. I
| also responded pretty aggressively when I didn't need to.
|
| Thanks for the link too, I'm reading through it atm.
|
| I agree that you shouldn't post prematurely and should
| learn more about the subject before you speak on it, but
| there are so many topics that come up throughout the day
| it's impossible to research all of them. I was hoping if
| the number wasn't suspicious, someone who knew better
| could explain it. Maybe it would have been better to
| phrase my comment as a question instead of a statement
| though.
| moviewise wrote:
| What you can do: Plant more eucalyptus trees in California
|
| Monarch butterflies in California need eucalyptus trees for
| their winter roost https://milliontrees.me/2013/11/01/monarch-
| butterflies-in-ca...
| mistrial9 wrote:
| untrue -- Blue Gum is not native.. aka eucalyptus;
| specialists needed here
| bombcar wrote:
| Yeah California has enough eucalyptus. I second the
| suggestion to plant native local plants that get the goals
| you want (eucalyptuses are the opposite of native).
| moviewise wrote:
| In Santa Cruz, California, where monarch butterflies roost
| in winter:
|
| "The number of Natural Bridges' overwintering butterflies
| is still down more than 95 percent since 1997, and the
| Tasmanian blue gum eucalyptus canopy that has sheltered
| generations of butterflies is falling apart."
|
| "Eucalyptus trees have small leaves that are thin enough
| for monarchs to wrap their feet around. For longer than
| anyone can remember, those trees have also provided the
| butterflies a convenient food source and a haven during the
| winter months, like a warm blanket or an umbrella to
| protect them from the wind and rain."
|
| https://www.goodtimes.sc/eucalyptus-grove-monarch-
| butterflie...
| [deleted]
| jolux wrote:
| Aren't eucalyptus trees invasive and a hazard for fire
| control? I know they're clear-cutting loads of eucalyptus in
| the Berkeley Hills for concerns of fire risk.
| bmitc wrote:
| The problem is destruction of native plants and habitat.
| Monarch butterflies only use milkweeds, such as swamp milkweed
| and common milkweed. It's my understanding that they like those
| two the most but maybe which milkweed they prefer is region
| dependent.
|
| If one wants to help the monarchs, and several other pollinator
| species, then plant swamp and common milkweed. They grow very
| easily and actually have pleasant blooms.
|
| It's almost as of the problem couldn't be simpler to solve.
| Just plant these and watch how much activity they generate
| almost immediately. I did it and have been seeing monarch
| butterflies lately. Not a lot, but some.
| grapeskin wrote:
| Destruction of the food source is one of major causes of the
| population drop, as mentioned in the linked article. It also
| mentions storms being able to wipe out millions.
|
| Even if there's 100x as much milkweed next year as there is
| this year, it terrifies me that a forest fire or something
| could easily wipe out such a small population today and
| that's the end of the line.
| bmitc wrote:
| But the solution is again: more native plants. Certainly
| wildfires will destroy any initiative there though.
|
| We have got to have a movement of restoring native plant
| life.
| hedora wrote:
| Some of this advice requires clarification. There's only one
| commercially available breed of milkweed available around
| here. (Ask for "native" and "for monarchs" at the nursery)
|
| Also, if you plant too close to the coast (5 or 10 miles;
| can't remember) it discourages migration, and does more harm
| than good.
|
| If you are near the coast, plant pollinator gardens (native
| wildflowers) instead. Your local nursery can give more
| accurate and more specific advice.
| atwood22 wrote:
| Most milkweed is poisonous to humans, dogs, and livestock.
| Not saying don't plant it, but just be aware if you have
| small kids around.
| bmitc wrote:
| The vast majority of plants are toxic to humans, dogs, and
| cats.
|
| The non-native daffodils that everyone and their dog plants
| are extremely toxic to dogs and cats and also humans. Same
| goes for many plant species, especially those that are
| commonly planted. The, again non-native, yew bushes that
| are planted everywhere are also extremely toxic.
|
| It isn't an excuse but people will hide behind it (not
| saying you do). If we wanted to eliminate all toxic plants,
| we'd literally have nothing and certainly no agriculture.
| colechristensen wrote:
| It tastes very bitter and you have to eat quite a lot of it
| for it to be dangerous. It's a risk but mostly for sheep
| and the like. Properly prepared, people do eat it
| intentionally.
| TedDoesntTalk wrote:
| I grew up surrounded by milkweed. Yet somehow I survived
| and never once thought "I'm going to eat this and see how
| it tastes."
|
| I have children now. I've never seen them taste arbitrary,
| random plants.
| micromacrofoot wrote:
| Unlikely to ever recover due to habitat loss. I remember seeing
| many many more monarchs in the early 80s, and it's insane to
| think I may have already seen the last one I'll ever see.
|
| Similar story with a much larger animal; the American bison.
| The low end estimates say their used to be 30 million roaming
| the plains. There are half a million now, most livestock. We'll
| never get them back.
| illwrks wrote:
| My parents and their neighbours had plenty of flowers and
| suitable plants growing in their gardens. They live in a small
| tourist town in south west Ireland.
|
| I have vivid memories as a child of what was likely thousands
| of monarch butterflies every summer, probably until I was 10 or
| so, in and around the flowers and plants. Then then open
| pastures behind my parents house were bulldozed and a private
| housing estate was built and at the same time my parents also
| tarred their front drive. From then on the butterflies started
| to dwindle significantly. Those two events were the only great
| change in the immediate surroundings until twelve-or-so years
| later when a brutal winter killed a lot of the trees and
| plants.
|
| Never again have I see as many in a single place.
| [deleted]
| ralusek wrote:
| I had a single milkweed potted plant on my roof. Within a day I
| saw a monarch on it. Within a few weeks I had about 20
| caterpillars devour it. Within a few more weeks, I counted 16
| chrysalises around my patio, of which 13 flew away successfully.
| Pretty amazing.
| nolroz wrote:
| My goodness that must have been a huge milkweed! I had three
| 2-3ft tall plants a while back and they were decimated by 9
| just caterpillars.
| rch wrote:
| I've been told, by a local farmer / restaurant owner from
| Torreon, that monarch preserves in Mexico are under pressure from
| cartels that want to convert the land into avocado farms, through
| violence if necessary. Some restaurants are already taking
| avocados off the menu as a result, and I've been cutting them out
| of my diet as well (irrespective of origin).
|
| Edit: here's a link --
| https://www.npr.org/2020/02/03/802359415/sadness-and-worry-a...
| Tiktaalik wrote:
| Depressing and infuriating.
|
| Local radio talking about this story interviewed gardeners that
| suggested planting milkweed, as if a some scattered houses will
| make any sort of difference.
|
| Meanwhile global climate change and widespread habitat
| destruction for farms and industry will doom the species.
|
| No discussion of the broader systemic issues or about how the
| status quo habits of our society has created this crisis.
| questiondev wrote:
| i know they really like milkweed which a lot of people kill
| without thinking of the environmental consequences.
| lbrindze wrote:
| One of the most interesting things I ever saw sailing was a
| singular monarch butterfly in the middle of the gulf-stream about
| halfway back from bermuda. This was over 300 miles away from any
| land (including bermuda).
|
| It stopped for a very brief rest (a second or two at most) and
| then continued flying in the opposite direction. Very unexpected
| and surreal but this really speaks to the sort of distances they
| can travel without stopping.
|
| Does anyone know how common these kind of sightings are? Very sad
| to find out that these butterflies are now considered endangered.
| micromacrofoot wrote:
| in the Atlantic? likely it was blown off course, they're
| obviously very light and winds play a large factor in their
| migration
|
| it's not unusual to spot a monarch somewhere in the Gulf of
| Mexico, like an oil rig, but it's not entirely clear how many
| try to take that 900 mile flight... it's more likely they're
| blown off course and won't make it to shore unless wind
| conditions are just right enough to carry them
| melling wrote:
| Here are some older HN discussions on the declining butterfly
| population.
|
| I only selected those that are at least 5 years old.
|
| https://hn.algolia.com/?dateEnd=1500508800&dateRange=custom&.
| ..
| goosegoose wrote:
| For those commenting that this is only the migratory subspecies -
| yes, you are quite correct, but do note that this is the only
| subspecies you will see in the USA - except in the south of
| Florida. The non-migratory subspecies is found from southern
| Florida down through the Caribbean, Central America, and South
| America north of the Amazon Drainage.
| retrocryptid wrote:
| If you find yourself in California's Monterey Bay area (Santa
| Cruz, Watsonville, Salinas, Monterey) there are still Monarch
| habitats you can visit. It's worth seeing if you're halfway
| interested in nature.
|
| And if you live in the area you can plant flowers to support the
| Monarch migration. I learned recently you're not supposed to
| plant milkweed close to the established breeding habitats, just
| plant regular wildflowers they can feed on while they're headed
| to the butterfly sex party.
|
| https://www.pgmuseum.org/how-to-help-monarchs
| valarauko wrote:
| > you're not supposed to plant milkweed close to the
| established breeding habitats
|
| Overwintering sites, not breeding sites. Monarchs migrating
| south & at the winter roosting sites don't need milkweed since
| they're not breeding or laying eggs. While the overwintering
| sites are in Central Mexico, the breeding sites for the
| northern migrants is in the Southwestern US - where they do
| need milkweed. Exposure to milkweed while overwintering
| triggers breeding and laying eggs, which is disruptive to the
| migration pattern. Native Milkweed elsewhere along the northern
| migration path is beneficial, just not where they're wintering.
| beckingz wrote:
| So what can we do as individuals to help?
| trgn wrote:
| Plant milkweed. They may take a few years to establish, but
| it's effective. We get monarchs every year now. This is in an
| urban area.
|
| Small conservation efforts really do make a difference. Don't
| be discouraged that you're not fixing the big issues.
| Pollinator gardens will improve biodiversity in your own little
| corner of the world, and that's worthwhile in and of itself.
| ehnto wrote:
| That's similar to advice I received from a raptor
| conservationist. More native foliage in suburbia means more
| bees and bugs, more bugs means more birds. They suggested a
| water bath and some native plants in your yard can go a long
| way to supporting the native wildlife the you may not even
| realize is in your area, until they have reason to stop by.
| kornhole wrote:
| If you have a yard in the right area, plant milkweed. I have at
| least 10 plants in my yard. I enjoy watching the little guys
| munching away until they suddenly dart off to the vines to
| cocoon.
| colechristensen wrote:
| Plant an oak tree in your yard and a variety of flowers that
| attract pollinators in your garden (and specifically milk weed
| for monarchs)
|
| Oak trees build ecosystems because an unusually large number of
| species of insect and birds use them and what feeds on them for
| food.
| Tiktaalik wrote:
| Plant butterfly friendly flowers. Vote for the politicians most
| aggressive on environmental issues.
| sdoering wrote:
| I only know Monarch Butterflies from documentaries.
|
| Sad that I will probably not be able to witness it with my own
| eyes.
| pastor_bob wrote:
| These are only the _migratory_ population.
|
| I always thought they were all migratory, but I guess some
| populations stick around in areas and aren't in as much danger.
|
| I see them not infrequently on the East Coast.
| whimsicalism wrote:
| There's a lot of lookalike butterflies though
| corrral wrote:
| I was always told the ones in Kansas were going to/from
| Mexico on this migration, but I gather from Wikipedia that
| that was all actually happening much farther West, and ours
| weren't the migratory kind.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-07-22 23:01 UTC)