Well, I haven't posted in a while, and that is just wrong. For those following, sorry!
    
Just going over my e-mail, and it looks like the Miami Blue Butterfly is going to be added to the Endangered Species List, and it will affect the Cassius Blue and others, as they look so similar. I sent a notice to the list where I received this telling members they better add this one to their collection before they're all gone. I hope to cause a firefight, as, you see, I have no use for collections of insects, and feel the collectors are just plain wrong. I feel the same way about trophy hunting.
    
      Not that I have anything against hunting, just trophy hunting; you are killing off your breeding stock. No farmer in this world would kill off his prize herd bull, but we do it every season by killing off "record breaking" deer, elk, moose, and what have you. And they wonder why there are so few record breakers in modern times. When you kill bucks with big antlers, you select against that trait, and select for smaller antlers (bucks with smaller antlers live, where the big boys get killed - smaller antlers live to get their genes to the next generation, while the big boys don't. Any other argument has little validity, and is just an excuse for trophy hunting.). Ask any Biologist. Oh, I am a Biologist! People who hunt for food, on the other hand, are hunting for the smaller, younger (and therefore less tough) specimens, and are leaving the bigger ones alone to breed and make healthy youngsters.
   Back to collecting. Same thing here. All the arguments with the notable exception of scientific research have little validity. One prominent group on the Internet (Yahoo Groups) has the motto "We cannot Protect What We Do Not Know". Another argument for collecting of moths and butterflies, and I say "horse apples" With modern photography and the ability to take close up photos of even genitalia, that argument ends in the scrap heap along with oology (collecting of bird's eggs) and plume hunting. And, yes, there are collectors who hunt butterflies commercially, to provide specimens to people who want to "fill out" their collections.


     Now, I figure that some of these folks would be just like the fellows in the early days of our country who collected birds and their eggs, and if it were legal, would happily collect them without a single thought or prick of conscience, and would argue loudly (and these butterfly and moth collectors do, flaming me mightily when I post my views on collecting) if we were to talk about outlawing it, but, alas, birds are protected for the most part by the North American Migratory Bird Treaty Act, and the hunting of game birds and waterfowl are tightly controlled. You see, market hunting (sort of like commercial butterfly and moth collectors) and egg collecting and specimen collection for people's drawing rooms, or even study skins (sort of like people's drawers full of butterflies) had cut many bird populations to almost nothing, forcing the US government in 1918 to step in and stop all of this, forming a treaty with Canada and (later) Mexico. Nothing, however, was ever done about collecting butterflies and their cousins the moths, which goes rolling along without a glitch, and these "responsible" collectors go out and teach young people how to do it, how to set up this once living stamp collection, and how to do it most effectively.

     Now, you see, what bothers me most is that these creatures are living, breathing entities, and people are killing them wantonly to make a pretty collection, in most cases before they even have a chance to breed, as they want "fresh" specimens. Older "worn" ones don't look so pretty, and thus hold less appeal. Of course, if you are good at collection, you will never have to see a worn one, as they won't have a chance to get that way.

     I hope this gives people a reason to think, and I hope they will think a little before attacking me. I do not see why we can't simply enjoy a living creature without the desire to catch it and add it to a collection.