Southern Migrant Hawker (1 Viewer)

[Binocularface]

Im sorry folks,just cant agree with everyone getting hot under the collar about the collecting of an "insect" especially a lot of people who are probably birders who have jumped on the "odonata" bandwagon

I am not sure I see how your latter sentence is relevent. So what if some people interest in odonata have come from a birding background, does this make their views any less valid?

how many of you stamp on spiders,swat flys and wasps,put ant powder down when you get up for breakfast and find them in the jam..

Well I don't do any of the above; however this is hardly comparible is it!

we birders dont seem to take criticism too well maybe we should leave the dragonfly experts to run their hobby as they see fit.

Speak for yourself on this one. I fail to see why anyone (whether they are interested in insects or not) should not be able to question the paractice of obtaining specimens.

 

[lewis20126]

..we birders dont seem to take criticism too well maybe we should leave the dragonfly experts to run their hobby as they see fit....

Like badger baiters?

a

 

[Imaginos]

(1) European
(2) Yes (BDS Code 2.2 Where tissue sampling (e.g. for molecular analysis) is a practicable alternative to killing, this should always be considered. DNA can be extracted from legs or exuviae.)
(3) If by collecting you mean killing then yes it can be done without killing - see 2.

1) Which part of Europe?

2) So it's OK to pull a leg off? (Just pulling your leg, haha).

In all seriousness there is plenty of information that can be usefully gleaned from getting an idea of precisely where these dragons came from - using weather data to find out whether they were tracking with, or against the wind, getting an idea of if anything else from that part of the world did/is likely to show up (including birds) etc. etc.

Not that I believe that's what this collector was collecting for but, like everyone else who has commented, I don't know that.

 

[Farnboro John]

I'm coming a bit late to this. Obviously most of the Penlee Green Darner arguments have been rehashed.

One that doesn't seem to have been looked at this time is the damage that is done to genuine conservation by the mixed message that killing a "rarity" gives to the public.

The public doesn't wholly understand the difference between rarity in the sense of an out of range vagrant (Green Darner) a struggling resident such as White-faced Darter in the southern end of its range and a potential colonist such as Southern Migrant Hawker.

Tell them its OK to kill a rarity - for whatever reason - and they will think it must be OK in any case. The value of public opinion to conservation so vastly outweighs the value to science of a voucher specimen as opposed to photographs and a non-fatal clip for DNA, as to render additional debate totally unnecessary.

In addition, in this particular case, it is apparent that colonisation is a possibility, and frankly this is done by live animals not dead specimens. Natural colonisation is a process we have no business interfering in.

All this leads to a presumption of collecting rarities being wrong, and whether or not twitchers get a tick as a consequence is irrelevant: though I personally think the reverential pursuit of rarities is preferable on any level to joining a mindless mob watching a football match whether live or slobbed in front of their respective TVs. I also think that the vast majority of twitchers do a far better job of enthusing the public about wildlife than almost anyone except David Attenborough.

John

 

[pdwinter]

1) Which part of Europe?

I've no idea - I was being facetious when i wrote Europe. Do you have a theory?

2) So it's OK to pull a leg off? (Just pulling your leg, haha).

In all seriousness there is plenty of information that can be usefully gleaned from getting an idea of precisely where these dragons came from - using weather data to find out whether they were tracking with, or against the wind, getting an idea of if anything else from that part of the world did/is likely to show up (including birds) etc. etc.

Not that I believe that's what this collector was collecting for but, like everyone else who has commented, I don't know that.

I'm not a scientist but I would have thought that if the SMHs do colonise the near future generations will still have DNA close to that which they arrived with and that would be a good time to get some DNA.

I would be surprised if there are emergent SMHs at Hadleigh CP next year but it will be good if there are. Sorry not to be more enthusiastic but I'm not a twitcher so lack the ability to enthuse the public

 

[RoyW]

I'm coming a bit late to this. Obviously most of the Penlee Green Darner arguments have been rehashed.

One that doesn't seem to have been looked at this time is the damage that is done to genuine conservation by the mixed message that killing a "rarity" gives to the public.

I mentioned the damage that such an incident could do to public opinion, + how acceptance of this incident could be viewed, in post 106 (although perhaps I could have worded it better, and I didn't mention other rare species).
It is important to remember that these are isolated incidents, and that the taking of the SMH has been pretty much condemed by all - including those who have argued that there are valid reasons for killing specimens in some cases.

The value of public opinion to conservation so vastly outweighs the value to science of a voucher specimen as opposed to photographs and a non-fatal clip for DNA, as to render additional debate totally unnecessary.

I agree completely in this case, as I believe do most of those who have posted here (at least where the identity can be confirmed without dissection). The debate about the validity of taking specimens has repeatly referenced the occasional need for this in groups where identification can not be made from photographs and field notes, rather than claiming that it is always necessary. In my experience this does not harm public opinion to conservation if done responsibly (with reasons explained if needed).

I also think that the vast majority of twitchers do a far better job of enthusing the public about wildlife than almost anyone except David Attenborough.

I have highlighted the key words used in the above quote in bold. Lets not forget that the collection of the SMH was an isolated incident by a collector taking the specimen solely for his own 'enjoyment' (and yes I believe that I do know this to be true, although I have not, and will not, post reasons on here). I would suggest that the vast majority of amateur entomologists also do a very good job of enthusing the public about conservation, even though insects are generally seen as less worthy of attention than birds to the general public. Lets not forget about the minority of twitchers, who rather than enthusing the public actually damage the public view of twitching (and conservation) because of their irresponsible attitude, and frequent disparaging remarks (how many of you have never heard a twitcher deliberately put down someone who has made a beginners mistake in a bird hide - possibly putting them off birdwatching, and conservation, in the process?).




On the subject of DNA, and it's potential to identify which part of Europe these SMH's came from (and potentially the weather patterns they followed), it's an interesting idea, but personally I would have thought that it is a non starter. Due to the migratory nature of the species I would expect that there is relatively little genetic variation across most of Europe (most populations away from the Meditterranean are considered tempory, sometimes being re-established by new immigrants - so DNA is constantly being mixed).
Even if DNA studies could establish the area that the Hadleigh ones came from, it would tell us little more than that because we cannot say for certain when they arrived (eg. did they arrive in numbers shortly before being discovered this summer, or did a few arrive sometime last year and we are now seeing the result of sucessful breeding?).

 

[Ukwildlifeo]

Spoke to someone who went to see them yesterday and he said that there is now a sign stating (something along the lines of) that the site is an SSSI and any collection of animals is illegal under bylaws, and any one collecting should be reported to the warden via the number on the sign

 

[James Hunter]

Here's the sign and the phone number for future reference...

 

[harry eales]

I believe the last three lines of that notice should be followed with great caution, otherwise anyone trying to stop someone collecting (although it is against the rules relating to SSSI's) may find themselves in trouble with the Law.

Collecting is not an Indictable Offence in Law, at best, it is a Summary Offence, thus there is no Citizens Power of Arrest. Attempting to restrain someone for collecting could land the individual(s) concerned in court themselves for unlawful arrest or assault.

Perhaps the notice needs rewording.

Harry

 

[davidearlgray]

Job done.....

I feel somewhat galled, having been responsible for getting hold of the original site information, and then making it public.

The finder was concerned that the news did not fall into the hands of 'collectors', but to his credit did confide in me. I could not imagine that they still existed, so after attemting to contact the finder a couple of times, without sucess, to get his blessing I did decide to publicise the Hadleigh site. I had not been sworn to secrecy anyway.

I still think this was the right thing to do as probably hundreds of genuine enthusiasts have enjoyed seeing this Dragonfly, without harming the site, the species, themselves or others.

What a shame that some selfish, backward looking, individual had to spoil things. The Victorian bird collecters had to move with the times, 20th century egg collectors had to wise up, surely it is time that the the more old-fashioned members of the Dragonfly community dragged themsleves into the 21st century!

As many have said there is a time and a place for collections but this was not one of them.

The good news is that it alerted many people to the possibility of SMH and they have been found in some other places, perhaps the tip of the iceberg? Lets just hope that the species is not wiped out before it gets established.

By the way, the photo is not mine nor does the photographer wish to get involved.

I don't think that the individual should necessarily be named but maybe someone who knows who it is can try to educate him.:C

GH

It's Indiana Jones!?!

 

[bedfontbirder]

I believe the last three lines of that notice should be followed with great caution, otherwise anyone trying to stop someone collecting (although it is against the rules relating to SSSI's) may find themselves in trouble with the Law.

Collecting is not an Indictable Offence in Law, at best, it is a Summary Offence, thus there is no Citizens Power of Arrest. Attempting to restrain someone for collecting could land the individual(s) concerned in court themselves for unlawful arrest or assault.

Perhaps the notice needs rewording.

Harry

Also, that regulations pertaining to SSSIs are not the same, and therefore a separate issue, to local bye-laws.

Cheers,

Adam

 

[kevindurose]

Harry,

I'm sure ramming a collecting net up an offenders rectum would prevent collection until the wardens arrive. But could you tell me whether this action would be covered by the last phrase of the sign? A bylaw or SSSI law? If not, as you say it may be worth getting the sign ammended.

Kev

 

[RoyW]

A further statement concerning this incident has now been posted on the BDS website:

"Southern Migrant Hawker collected
Southern Migrant Hawkers, including ovipositing pairs, have been found in Essex and Kent in recent weeks (see 'Hot News'). There have been only four previous records of this species in Britain. It has come to our notice that one of up to ten present at Hadleigh Country Park, Essex, was collected on 3rd August. The BDS had no prior knowledge of the individual's intent, but has now fully investigated this incident.

The individual concerned has written to the BDS and admits collecting the Southern Migrant Hawker, but had no idea it would upset so many people. He now realises that he has transgressed the Members' Code of Practice on collecting dragonflies and has offered to resign his membership of the BDS. He has also offered his most sincere and humble apologies to the BDS and to everyone else he has offended by his actions. As a result of this incident, he has decided to put away his net forever and take only his binoculars into the field with him in future. The BDS hopes that others who might be tempted to consider collecting dragonflies, other than for valid scientific purposes in line with the Code of Practice, will take note of the adverse reaction that this incident has generated. This statement and the apology above from the gentleman involved should bring this matter to a close."



With the individual concerned recognising that his actions in this case were not considered acceptably, and vowing not to put away his net, I would suggest that the best possibly outcome following the event has perhaps been reached. The obvious objections to collecting such as this occurence will have reached many (the issue has been raised on several other forums that I am aware of), and all will be aware that such incidents are not considered acceptable. Perhaps it is now time to let the issue rest?

 

[jalethbridge]

I think you're right Roy, time to draw a line. It is a welcome statement, both from the collector and the BDS.

(Though personally I found Kev's comment very funny, coming as it did after 250 thinly veiled comments from Harry essentially defending collecting. This is not intended to be [overly] provocative. The debate needed both sides, and though Harry was never going to be onto a winner, I felt post #112 in particular was very instructive, and I learnt a lot.)

 

[RoyW]

(Though personally I found Kev's comment very funny, coming as it did after 250 thinly veiled comments from Harry essentially defending collecting. This is not intended to be [overly] provocative. The debate needed both sides, and though Harry was never going to be onto a winner, I felt post #112 in particular was very instructive, and I learnt a lot.)

As I said in my reply to Farnboro John's comments, it's all comes down to how responsible the behaviour is. Collecting specimens should not automatically be considered bad - but the reasons, and the opinions of others should always be considered carefully.
This should be viewed as an isolated incident, in the same way as the occasional irresponsible behaviour by (for example) individual photographers should be. If any such situation should arise in the future every attempt, short of physically restraint, can be made to change the mind of the individual(s) involved (and hopefully this will be all that is needed). I have no doubt that the possible legal implications of taking physical action are well known!

 

[harry eales]

Harry,

I'm sure ramming a collecting net up an offenders rectum would prevent collection until the wardens arrive. But could you tell me whether this action would be covered by the last phrase of the sign? A bylaw or SSSI law? If not, as you say it may be worth getting the sign ammended.

Kev

Hello Kev,

Indecent assault with a blunt instrument can put a severe damper on all your outdoor activities for several years, although you may be able to spot the odd Sparrow or two during your one hour daily sports period.

They may even let you have visitors occasionally. lol.

Harry

 

[CornishExile]

Hello Kev,

Indecent assault with a blunt instrument can put a severe damper on all your outdoor activities for several years, although you may be able to spot the odd Sparrow or two during your one hour daily sports period.

They may even let you have visitors occasionally. lol.

Harry

Apart from the ones he could expect when he drops the soap?

ce

 

[harry eales]

I think you're right Roy, time to draw a line. It is a welcome statement, both from the collector and the BDS.

(Though personally I found Kev's comment very funny, coming as it did after 250 thinly veiled comments from Harry essentially defending collecting. This is not intended to be [overly] provocative. The debate needed both sides, and though Harry was never going to be onto a winner, I felt post #112 in particular was very instructive, and I learnt a lot.)

Hello JA,

I also agree it's time to call it a day with this thread. Perhaps I am from the old school of entomologists, after all I'm pushing 70 years of age. I doubt if anyone will change my opinions or I theirs.

I came directly into entomology rather then come in from another nature interest source. Today many come in from Botany and of course ornithology and I think that it your grounding in your first choice of subject that forms the basis of held opinions. Entomologists and Botanists tend look upon their subjects from more of a scientific viewpoint than apparently do ornithologists.

I know one very good naturalist who started out as a birder, and became a rabid twitcher, he would drive 500 miles at the drop of a hat at the mere sniff of a rare bird. When he came into looking at butterflies and dragonflies he was immensely proud of having seen all the resident British breeding species of both Insect Orders in just two years. He couldn't understand why I didn't go flying all over Britain ticking them off in my books. I merely told him I wasn't interested. My interest is in what species occur and where, in the two most northerly counties in England on the east coast. I've spent over half a century doing this and I'm far from finished, in retrospect I bit off too much, I should have just covered one county and could have done it more efficiently. The 2,000 sq miles area of Northumberland is probably more than enough for anyone.

The changes I have seen in 50 years has been amazing, I wonder how many people would take up any aspect of nature study if they had to go back to the days before computers and the internet, when records were made only in a notebook and communication between other enthusiasts was not by long distance phone call, but a note to a quarterly entomological journal. Most of the entomologists I have knew in my early years were all collectors, many like myself bred inumerable insects, it's from people like us that the books that are published today have a good deal of accurate information in them, unlike some of the Victorian books that I had to use.

I have had one twitch (birds) A Great Auk adult and a juvenile and a great Auk egg. I'll let you guess where I saw them.

Harry

 

[SteveClifton]

I visited Hadleigh Castle CP yesterday and thought others might like an update on the SMH. It turned out to be an excellent day, but timing could be worth bearing in mind.

I was on site all day, yet despite it being sunny from early on, I didn't even get a sniff of a SMH until about 1pm (nor did anyone else I met, though there weren't many looking early on). There were however several mixta on the wing, as well as plenty of Scarce Emeralds, Common and Ruddy Darters, a single Marbled White, and plenty of Gatekeepers (hundreds!) and quite a few Holly Blues too.

I was becoming a bit despondent by early afternoon, and considered leaving 'empty handed', but then a male SMH was seen briefly by another observer by the school dipping platform (see r/h marker on map) hawking up and down the ditch. By the time I got there it had moved on unfortunately.

About an hour later another male was seen by the middle marker (thanks Nigel for finding it!), but was only on the wing for perhaps 5 mins, then it disappeared. Despite searching I couldn't find it perched anywhere in the area. Thankfully I managed to rattle off a few shots of it before it went.

About 3pm was my 2nd and last sighting, near the end of the ditch (left marker). Again it was only on the wing for about 5 minutes, then it also disappeared.

For anyone still thinking of going, a few tips based on what I've seen/read & from talking to others, including the original finder who was there too:

• SMH seem to hawk near the ground, perhaps less than 1m high, whereas most 'mixta' are higher than this or at least vary their height
  
• Search any of the small pools(mostly along the hedge) & ditches in the area defined on the attached map, and even when you've looked once, keep going back and checking regularly as one might move in for a quick look then move off again. Based on my limited experience the drier ditches/pools are more likely places to see one than over open water.
  
• Afternoons seem to be more productive than mornings. Evenings might also be worth a try?
  
• Some 'mixta' can be pretty bright, but when you see a SMH there is no mistaking it. Very bright blue (similar brightness to a male Emperor) & at the front end too due to the bright blue eyes.

A pair were also seen in tandem further east than you can see on my map (about 2 ditches along from the school dipping platform), so at least 5 individuals are still there. By the end of the afternoon there were many more dragonflies on the wing, including at least 3 Brown Hawkers & 3-4 Emperors which were very photogenic (more pics on Surfbirds insect galleries).

Hope this was helpful to someone, I know that at least 2 other visitors (plus myself) had read & printed off similar info from this thread! The last pic is a MH for comparison.

Steve

 

[redeyedvideo]

With the individual concerned recognising that his actions in this case were not considered acceptably, and vowing not? to put away his net, I would suggest that the best possibly outcome following the event has perhaps been reached. The obvious objections to collecting such as this occurence will have reached many (the issue has been raised on several other forums that I am aware of), and all will be aware that such incidents are not considered acceptable. Perhaps it is now time to let the issue rest?

I wonder if having his photograph (322 views so far) published on a Worldwide internet forum had anything to do with his decision?