SocraticGadfly: Help protect monarch butterflies

December 30, 2024

Help protect monarch butterflies

Author photo: Monarch at Hagerman NWR.

FINALLY, the US Fish and Wildlife Service has proposed an Endangered Species Act listing as "threatened" the monarch butterfly. (I say "finally" because the Center for Biological Diversity was pushing for this a decade ago.)

But, it's just proposed. They're going to need backup, since the likes of Texas Ag Commish Sid Miller are going apeshit over this.

So?

Here's where you comment. In support!

Here's what I said:

Dear USFWS: I appreciate the proposed "threatened" listing. My one quibble is that most of the stronger protections, such as critical habitat areas being designated for protection, apply only to the Western monarch subspecies. (I know that USFWS can't do anything about Mexican overwintering grounds for most monarchs. I would like USFWS to consider critical habitat designation elsewhere. (I'm familiar with USFWS feet-dragging on critical habitat for the dunes sagebrush lizard.)
That said, any exception for pesticides should be extremely limited, and should only be adopted based on statements by lepidopterists etc allowing that limited use of certain pesticides will not be a monarch / milkweed danger.
Beyond the listing itself, USFWS should work with other federal and state agencies, including state transportation departments on roadways, to increase milkweed propagation through sowing, increased use of no-mow / limited-mow areas, etc. Sincerely, /me

Click that link! (Scroll to the bottom for the comment button.)

As for Sid? He's full of it. As noted in my comment, except for the Western subspecies, a fair chunk of whose acreage is on land either of a governmental agency or private conservation organization, there IS NO critical habitat designation. Per what I said about pesticides, FWS may well create a Mack Truck sized loophole.

And, contra Mr. Jeebus Shot? A number of farmers are, at least tentatively in support. Per the Chronicle, that includes one Zippy Duvall, head honcho at the American Farm Bureau.

That said? Per what I said in my comment about Mexico? The Chron notes that many scientists think FWS has the wrong focus:

Many scientists believe monarch butterflies are not endangered, but their migration is. A study released in October by the University of Georgia found the monarch butterfly's breeding population is relatively stable and similar to historical abundances. However, the species' fall migratory population is in serious decline. The study, which suggests the insects are dying off during their fall migration south to Mexico, points to the planting of non-native milkweeds along the migration path resulting in the rise of a parasite called Ophryocystis elektroscirrha (OE), which infects and debilitates monarch butterflies. The release of captive-reared butterflies, which are not as good at migrating, is also a factor.
Andy Davis, assistant research scientist at the University of Georgia Odum School of Ecology and lead author of the study, expressed frustration with the USFWS listing decision, opining that it may cause more harm than good. "I think the biggest problem will be that this ruling will further convince people that monarchs need to be saved in their own yards by rearing them in 'protective captivity,'" he wrote on Facebook. "And since this ruling has no real meaningful restrictions on this practice (in fact the USFWS encourages it in their press release), then we will likely see further increases in OE levels across the board, more non-native milkweed being sold, and fewer and fewer monarchs successfully reaching their winter destinations."

Hard to argue with that.

On the other hand, as the Chron also notes, a listing is the only tool in the FWS arsenal:

"Unfortunately, no possibility exists for listing a phenomenon such as a migration as threatened or endangered under the ESA," wrote Monika Maeckle, who tracks the insects and runs the website Texas Butterfly Ranch in San Antonio. "Listing the species itself may be the only recourse for protection."

Hard to argue with that, too. 

America's Ranchers™ also support a listing, well, if any conservation efforts are purely voluntary.

No comments: