Mona Miller wrote:The threats are listed in the article. People just need to read it.
I don't see any listing of threats. I see only vague suggestions of threats without
supporting documentation; e.g. he says this with regard to the overwintering
forests in Mexico: "any factor that opens the protective forest canopy to the harsher
influences of wind, rain, snow, and cold by night, to intense sunshine, desiccation,
and overheating by day" but no mention is made about the fact that the butterflies
PREFER to position their colonies on the periphery of holes in the forest to begin with.
Like this: http://saber.net/monarch/pelonhole.jpg
there is an abundance of closed canopy forest available next to the hole. And he
doesn't mention that the one colony in Mexico with the highest density of trees (Piedra
Herrada) is, ironically, the same colony that suffered the most severe
mortality (90%) ever recorded from a storm and freeze (in 1992). So the whole
concept "forest canopy is a critically important blanket" is more hypothetical
than well documented.
Likewise Pyle says: "Butterfly profiteers rear monarchs for indiscriminate
release at weddings and other events, smearing our picture of their natural movements,
so critical for conservation," but he doesn't mention any specific cases where wedding
butterflies have smeared our understanding of monarch movements in a way that interfered
with or altered conservation efforts.