Monarch Butterfly Numbers Plummet 86 Percent In California (usatoday.com) 148
An anonymous reader quotes a report from USA Today: The number of monarch butterflies turning up at California's overwintering sites has dropped by about 86 percent compared to only a year ago, according to the Xerces Society, which organizes a yearly count of the iconic creatures. That's bad news for a species whose numbers have already declined an estimated 97 percent since the 1980s. Each year, monarchs in the western United States migrate from inland areas to California's coastline to spend the winter, usually between September and February. Results from the count so far show that the number of monarchs at 97 California overwintering sites has dropped from around 148,000 in 2017 to just over 20,400 this year. Counts for dozens of other sites are still being tabulated, but the outlook is troubling.
What's causing the dramatic drop-off is somewhat of a mystery. Experts believe the decline is spurred by a confluence of unfortunate factors, including late rainy-season storms across California last March, the effects of the state's yearslong drought and the seemingly relentless onslaught of wildfires that have burned acres upon acres of habitat and at times choked the air with toxic smoke. The Thomas Fire last year burned almost 300,000 acres, including areas important for monarch breeding and migration. More recently, the Woolsey Fire damaged at least four monarch butterfly overwintering sites in the Malibu area, according to Lara Drizd, a wildlife biologist with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in Ventura.
What's causing the dramatic drop-off is somewhat of a mystery. Experts believe the decline is spurred by a confluence of unfortunate factors, including late rainy-season storms across California last March, the effects of the state's yearslong drought and the seemingly relentless onslaught of wildfires that have burned acres upon acres of habitat and at times choked the air with toxic smoke. The Thomas Fire last year burned almost 300,000 acres, including areas important for monarch breeding and migration. More recently, the Woolsey Fire damaged at least four monarch butterfly overwintering sites in the Malibu area, according to Lara Drizd, a wildlife biologist with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in Ventura.
monocrop annual ag destroys ecosystems (Score:2)
Re:monocrop annual ag destroys ecosystems (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
No rice fields are not "great for ecosystems" (Score:3)
Rice fields are pretty great for ecosystems. They help migrating birds, for example, and walking through them you see all kinds of wildlife.
I don't think you understand the question or the meaning of the term ecosystem [wikipedia.org]. Rice fields REPLACE a diverse and complicated ecosystem with a monoculture one. While that might benefit a few species, it's a net loss to the environment for the benefit of feeding humans. In most cases it doesn't matter too much until you get to the point where too much land has been purposed for farming and there is no food or other vital resources available to species that need that sort of ecosystem to survive. Monarch
Re: (Score:2)
Just because some species can coexist compatibly with human agriculture doesn't mean that it's "great for ecosystems". Quite the opposite in most cases.
The beautiful thing about nature; that which does survive the change in ecosystems, becomes the new ecosystem. Good, Bad, indifferent... doesn't really matter.
Re: (Score:1)
Just because some species can coexist compatibly with human agriculture doesn't mean that it's "great for ecosystems". Quite the opposite in most cases.
The beautiful thing about nature; that which does survive the change in ecosystems, becomes the new ecosystem. Good, Bad, indifferent... doesn't really matter.
A few ways to think about that statement...
Re: No rice fields are not "great for ecosystems" (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
To know if a rice field increases diversity or decreases diversity, you need to know what was there before. To say that it can only decrease diversity is unscientific.
Monocropping by definition decreases diversity.
I'm not really sure what your point is.
Abundance of Ohio River Valley during Jefferson administration http://bit.ly/1cbC2uU [bit.ly]
Re: (Score:2)
Abundance of Ohio River Valley during Jefferson administration
Is cool but kind of irrelevant
Re: (Score:1)
Abundance of Ohio River Valley during Jefferson administration
Is cool but kind of irrelevant
If you don't understand how monocropping affects ecosystems, then you may want to be careful about using the word "irrelevant."
Re: (Score:2)
"Every culture that has depended on annual plants for their staple food crops has collapsed."
Oh come on, now that's just a huge non sequitur, and you know it. There are plenty of reasons cultures collapse, and most of them it's not because of their dependence on annual plants for food.
Furthermore it's completely false. There are plenty of cultures around right now that depend on annual plants as a staple food crop. America as one example.
I seriously recommend you stop listening to that guy because he just spews nonsense.
Re: (Score:1)
Furthermore it's completely false. There are plenty of cultures around right now that depend on annual plants as a staple food crop. America as one example. I seriously recommend you stop listening to that guy because he just spews nonsense.
Ah yes, American exceptionalism... "irrelevant", "spews nonsense"...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: No rice fields are not "great for ecosystems" (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
It was totally fine until foreign invaders entered in.
I think there's a famous wall in China that tried to keep invaders out. You may want to study up on that. Ag societies are always worried about invasions. Then one day we find out the bees & butterflies are dying out.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
The links I've shared are from practitioners
I'm a practitioner, too. I've worked for over 10 years on a farm, living there. Don't tell me what is right and wrong.
Re: (Score:1)
We're either listening to podcasts from morons, or we're reading books from scientists and becoming wise. You're obviously doing the former.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
He doesn't have one.
Re: (Score:2)
Every ecosystem that included humans.
At least, it was better for the humans. Being a human, I find that to be an important concern.
Re: (Score:1)
Every ecosystem that included humans.
At least, it was better for the humans. Being a human, I find that to be an important concern.
"Every culture that has depended on annual plants for their staple food crops has collapsed." http://bit.ly/1ck0tnM [bit.ly]
Not too surprising (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:1)
But he said more than “it’s cyclical”
Re: (Score:2)
No you didn't.
He clearly did. I have no idea if it's correct or not but he clearly goes on to mention milkweed availability as a root cause. Again, no clue if that's right or wrong but it was said.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I have my own little group of trolls who love to lie about anything I write.
Pretty sure it's just one person, and since their writing style is so similar across their trolling to multiple people. It's likely someone who's either very lonely, or has a mental illness.
Re: (Score:2)
Can you actually use Google or DDG to find areas where native Milkweed is a noxious weed?
Noxious weed has a legal meaning, basically that there is a requirement to control them.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
So Aslepias sp. is considered a restricted (can't sell seed or other seed contaminated with it) toxic weed in Hawaii. Perhaps you're confusing Cynanchum which is sometimes called climbing milkweed, with the true milkweeds that Monarch's feed on?
This is why it is important to use scientific names rather then common names.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
You might want to save yourself the trouble and look by state, because A.Syriaca is considered a noxious weed as well. Along with other varieties again varying by state. NY, MI, MA, W.DC, MI, IN and so on. They've only been rolled back in the last few years, the fundamental point that put them on the list was mentioned before.
Re:Not too surprising (Score:5, Interesting)
My mom raises bees on her farm, and has a half acre dedicated to wildflowers, buckwheat for the bees, and thousands of milkweed plants. If more people would do the same, the world would have more butterflies.
If you have a backyard, you should consider scrapping your lawnmower, and getting some wildflower and milkweed seeds.
Re: (Score:2)
If you have a backyard, you should consider scrapping your lawnmower, and getting some wildflower and milkweed seeds.
The local government would fine me for doing that.
Re:Not too surprising (Score:5, Interesting)
Spot on. Ontario did the same thing under the previous government and declared it a "noxious weed" [www.cbc.ca] in ~2002 or so and monarch numbers plummeted. This is and absolute man-made problem caused by removing a key plant, and in many cases like here in Ontario it was environmentalists and NIMBY's that pushed for it to be labeled as such. The factory farms then got on board because it then allowed them to use more aggressive herbicides to kill it back, especially where it liked to grow with soybeans. Further, the provincial government then pushed local(city/county) to pass bylaws with heavy financial penalties. Around here it was a fine of $500/plant, smoking in a non-smoking building is $2000 to put in perspective.
Re: (Score:2)
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada... [www.cbc.ca]
Re: (Score:2)
Where do you get your info? It seems consistently wrong to one degree or another and very slanted such as blaming environmentalists for the dairy farmers lobbying.
Reality. "Nicoll says" this is incorrect, Nicoll is a city-idiot. I'm not faulting her for being an idiot, she just is. I do commend her for actually fixing a 4 year old problem however, because you can bet your ass people were still being fined or threatened by bylaw officers after it came off the NWA in 2014. The CBC like normal didn't even do the basic diligence of digging for the facts. It doesn't make the milk taste slightly sour. And even if it did, you wouldn't notice it because in Canada we use
Re: (Score:2)
We're still left with your claim that environmentalists put it on the list. Anyways looking more at the Ontario's government sites, it seems it was actually considered poisonous to livestock, especially sheep.
I must say that having been a pesticide applicator when young, including getting a (BC) ticket in forestry, Ontario does seem to go crazy with their noxious weeds. Here they're pretty well invasive weeds rather then ones that upset farmers
Re: (Score:2)
We're still left with your claim that environmentalists put it on the list.
Sure, just dust off the government regulation hearings back in 2002ish and you'll find it quickly.
I must say that having been a pesticide applicator when young, including getting a (BC) ticket in forestry, Ontario does seem to go crazy with their noxious weeds. Here they're pretty well invasive weeds rather then ones that upset farmers
Milkweed aka A.Syriaca [wikipedia.org] is the type we're talking about here, and is a primary plant for monarch butterflies that range from Canada in the east. But Ontario listed ALL Asclepais varieties as a noxious weed. The type mainly in BC is Asclepias Speciosa, and was also under the restriction of the noxious weed and invasive plants act.
Re: (Score:2)
We're still left with your claim that environmentalists put it on the list.
Sure, just dust off the government regulation hearings back in 2002ish and you'll find it quickly.
Well I can't find any info on the hearings. Did find info on it being removed about 1990. Seemed to be a lot of confusion on actual species with the regulation being too broad and a mixup with Vincetoxicum, which are also called milkweeds in some circles. This did seem to be pushed by environmentalists trying to help the Monarch.
https://www.ontariocanada.com/... [ontariocanada.com]
I must say that having been a pesticide applicator when young, including getting a (BC) ticket in forestry, Ontario does seem to go crazy with their noxious weeds. Here they're pretty well invasive weeds rather then ones that upset farmers
Milkweed aka A.Syriaca [wikipedia.org] is the type we're talking about here, and is a primary plant for monarch butterflies that range from Canada in the east. But Ontario listed ALL Asclepais varieties as a noxious weed. The type mainly in BC is Asclepias Speciosa, and was also under the restriction of the noxious weed and invasive plants act.
I can't find any noxious weed list from BC that includes any species of Asclepias. Even checked my literature from about 1980. It seems fairly rare
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, in Ontario it was entirely the factory farms that lobbied for it
Actually in Ontario, it was started by a bunch of city idiots in Toronto, because some kid decided to eat a bunch of the leaves and nearly died. Said kid, was the kid of a big donor the Liberal party of Ontario and the factory farms were all over it once the initial idea hit the OL pre-comittee to update the noxious weed act. Give you bonus points if you can figure out the child-rearing method that said ultra rich parents believed in. Double points if you can find their last name.
and the environmentalists who got milkweed removed from the list.
And it was the environmen
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
OTOH, from https://monarchjointventure.or... [monarchjointventure.org]
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
Democratic socialist states, where the government stands up for its citizens, do rather well from a quality of life perspective.
Do you mean states like Sweden, where the government let in thousands of muslim immigrants creating zones where even the police say they have difficulty operating. Or maybe you mean Germany where they let muslim men get away with rape on new year 2016, simply because they didn't want to seem racially insensitive.
You may like their health care system, but to insinuate that democratic socialist states stand up for their citizens is a bit naive.
Re: (Score:3)
"Monarch butterflies stop elsewhere due to fires" (Score:3)
It's not even that they aren't in California; they aren't in the usual spot, which might be because the usual spot was burned in a wildfire. As far as we know, they are three miles from their usual spot.
Re: (Score:1)
Well we still have some eastern monarchs left (Score:3)
https://blog.nwf.org/2018/03/m... [nwf.org]
I've been allowing milkweeds to grow on my property since I bought it. I mow around them...
Leaving with the rest of the middle class (Score:2)
Maybe California should slow the human encroachment into their habitats. With people comes noise, pollution, abnormal lighting and invasive species.
And California should stop encouraging building in fire zones [reason.com].
Re: (Score:3)
So then why is it that California is 12% of the population of the whole US, and yet 25% of the homeless population lives there?
Because the weather is nice?
They had wildfires (Score:1)
Remember?
Luckily we still got the bees (Score:2)
I thought you all knew (Score:1)
The cartel in Mexico is destroying the butterflies environment with the production of heroin, meth and other drug processing without regard to the damages to the local areas. Not to mention their allergy and suffering debilitating effects of marijuana smoke.
Perfectly normal (Score:5, Informative)
Massive fluctuations in the butterfly population are perfectly normal. [yale.edu]
The link goes to a paper from 1974, and looks at data back into the 1950s. For example: "A population peak occurred in 1950 and 1951 followed by a marked reduction in numbers in 1952; by 1953 the populations had been reduced to such an extent that no over-night roosting colonies could be found in areas where they had previously occurred in thousands and only seven field specimens were collected throughout the entire summer period. "
Perfectly Appropriate (Score:5, Funny)
Sad (Score:1, Interesting)
As an old fart who remembers when monarchs were commonplace, I can't help but feel sad for future generations who will never see their beauty. Young people now grow up in a world where NOT seeing monarchs is normal. That's part of the problem, right? The baseline for how the world is is shifting so it's hard for new generations to appreciate the effect human activity has had on the planet.
Our planetwide ecosystem is collapsing. It requires dramatic changes to how to handle ourselves. The current human popul
Re:Sad (Score:5, Informative)
Our planetwide ecosystem is collapsing
In America it's improved dramatically. Remember when rivers actually used to catch fire? Our air quality is so much better than it used to be, we used to pump so much lead into the air that it caused mental problems.
There are some issues in the developing world, but overall they've learned to move through the developing phase much more cleanly than we did (of course, they learned lessons from our mistakes, which is a good thing).
Re: (Score:1)
Air quality is just one factor. It's great that you can breath better and that the air doesn't drive you mad. However, there are other factors here and those are clearly relevant to the health of Monarchs.
Understandable (Score:5, Funny)
I mean, come on. They’re Monarchs, most are going to be very conservative. You think they’re gonna feel welcome in California?
More great results (Score:1)
from leftists fucktards. Good job.
Insightful joke (Score:2)
Something something The Venture Bros
Obvious (Score:1)
It's probably Neonicotinoids. It's a poison that kills everything.
Dinner time (Score:3)
Butterflys are Flamable. (Score:2)
What else is new?
Was just at the Monarch Butterfly preserve (Score:2)
I literally just went with my son to the Butterfly Preserve that's located in Goleta, near Isla Vista (think UCSB). No butterfly sightings. The flowers were not in bloom.
Let's hope people realize milkweed has a purpose, just as mixed crops in farms and hedgerows are what sustain bees.
self evident that this is all around (Score:2)
In addition, here in Colorado, we have what are called Miller moths. 10 years ago, we would have 100s outside and 10s inside. Now, I hardly see any Millers.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Keep doing that great Trump advertising. Every single slashdot article. You know the saying - no such thing as bad publicity! For free, too. You're gonna help us come 2020. Terrific job, terrific. I'm sure he thanks you bigly.
Will it even come to an election in 2020? Trump is already behaving like a Monarch so it should not become as a surprise if he dispenses with such tiresome theatre as elections and crowns himself on the White House lawn?
100% Offtopic? ... after I cleverly worked the word 'monarch' into the post, UNFAIR!!!! :-(
Re: Maybe they are allergic to poop in streets (Score:3, Insightful)
Actually a study in 2015 correlated the decline of milkweed due to use of pesticides across the states. Milkweed is the only food source for the caterpillars of these butterflies. By the time of the study the population has already dropped 90 percent in 20 years and the species was considered to be put on the list of endangered animals. What this has to do with trump, I have no idea.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually a study in 2015 correlated the decline of milkweed due to use of pesticides across the states. Milkweed is the only food source for the caterpillars of these butterflies. By the time of the study the population has already dropped 90 percent in 20 years and the species was considered to be put on the list of endangered animals. What this has to do with trump, I have no idea.
I planted some milkweed in our garden. It isn't a particularly attractive plant but it does attract monarch butterflies, which are very cool to have around. I don't think knowledge of monarchs loving milkweed is common enough, I had never heard of this until I was 32 years old.
Re: (Score:1)
Seems the wall is working already.