• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Catching/trapping of moths/butterflies (1 Viewer)

iraqbabbler

Well-known member
I'm just curious if trapping moths/butterflies invariably means killing them in the process, or do some/any of them get released? :smoke:
 
I trap moths regularly, and all are released. As far as I am aware, this is the same for most other moth enthusiasts, with just a few retained for ID by dissection where this is needed for certainty of identification.
 
MOST if not all who catch moths will release them.

The only usual exception is a tricky identification which can mean that dissection is required to be sure.

Andy
 
Hi
The comments that Andy and Mark make are true for most people who undertake moth trapping in the UK. In fact there is a detailed Code of Collecting that is published by the Britiish Entomological and Natural History Society, among others. The same can be said for many trappers worldwide.
However, there are a very small number of instances where this is not practical. For instance, in Scandinavian (and other countries) where moth trapping is undertaken in extremely remote locations for research reasons, the traps can only be visited every month or so, so these use what are called total-kill traps fitted with solar-recharged batteries. They are small actinic traps and only sample a small percentage of the total population of moths, but they are the exception to the 'norm'.
I trap both here in the UK and abroad and I would estimate that less than 1% of any night's trapping is retained for further studies, as mention above, but those studies have added much to our knowledge of the distribution of moths as well as discovering species new to Britain, Europe or even Science.
Best wishes
Martin
 
Last edited:
In England I've only met the catch and release sort of traps. In California where I've only ever seen one person with a trap, they used a fatal bait trap which gives you a pile of dead moths in the morning (not ideal for the "list keepers" unless you are the one who set up the trap!).
 
Thanks for the info.
I must say that I find it unconscionable to kill something just to be able to say that you've seen it; "absolute certainty" or not!

Imagine if we did that with birds! ;)
 
For the majority of amateur enthusiast I suspect that digital photography has replaced retaining specimens, easier to store and move. In some countries though where new fauna are encountered then voucher specimens are required as is DNA material. Whilst I don't have a collection my self I do retain a small number (prob less than 100 per annum) to send to specialists to ID, there are many undescribed species here. I believe the same is true for new avian species, voucher specimens are retained.
 
Thanks for the info.
I must say that I find it unconscionable to kill something just to be able to say that you've seen it; "absolute certainty" or not!

Imagine if we did that with birds! ;)
Hi
I quite understand your position but without the fact that people over the years have collected, studied, described and illustrated those species that have been taken for research purposes (i'e' killed), we wouldn't be in the position we are today where many people without that specialist knowledge can identify the things they see. In my field, the insects, it is impossible to know (i.e. discover) one species from another without taking specimens. Even DNA doesn't help because you have to have something already described with which to compare it. Most of the bird fieldguides could not have been written without access to comprehensive reference collections of bird skins. Modern technology is assisting that process but it is still far from being the only answer.
For my own part, I have 'discovered' at least four species that are new to science (i.e. not previously described) -- not from an obscure country but Europe - in fact the highly popular holiday destination of Mallorca (Balearic Islands, Spain). The knowledge I'm attempting to gain about the biology of these species can then, hopefully, be put back into conservation efforts within the island.
Martin
 
Thanks for the info.
I must say that I find it unconscionable to kill something just to be able to say that you've seen it; "absolute certainty" or not!

Imagine if we did that with birds! ;)

Imagine if when you drove home at night you killed 100 birds per mile.

But more seriously, different population dynamics, different identification challenges, different ability to contribute to knowledge and conservation, etc. I would find it unconscionable if the knowledge was not acquired and species named so we had a chance to take steps to preserve the world's remaining biodiversity.

All the best
 
Last edited:
You have to understand that there is a difference between "hobbyists" and "scientific collectors". The latter often use lethal traps as a requirement, because those traps increase the trap yields by more than double in many cases (albeit they are all dead, but for scientific value that is more useful than having a fraction of the total, some alive, some that have battered themselves and other moths to death through the night, etc.).
 
You have to understand that there is a difference between "hobbyists" and "scientific collectors". The latter often use lethal traps as a requirement, because those traps increase the trap yields by more than double in many cases (albeit they are all dead, but for scientific value that is more useful than having a fraction of the total, some alive, some that have battered themselves and other moths to death through the night, etc.).

The only kill traps of which I am aware in Britain and Ireland used in lepidoptera for scientific research are the Rothampsted traps which are designed to catch FEWER moths and in respect of which the contents are often longstanding and battered and identified by dissection.

The proportion of moths that die or batter themselves in 'hobbyists' traps is very small. So I'm sorry to say that I do not recognise the accuracy of your comments at all in a British and Irish context.

Pit fall traps with lethal preservatives for other orders are far more commonly used. On a number of other scientific surveys, the approaches with which I am familiar tend to be sampling or retention of identification of tricky species from for example sweeping even with difficult orders like diptera. I know of a number of scientific studies on moths done by non-lethal light-trapping or night-time transects or larval searches or even day-time transects.

All the best
 
Last edited:
Hi Paul,
I'm not well versed enough in the hobby to know these things, but I've said before I've only ever seen mass-kill traps where I'm at in America, and never in the UK. I don't know if it is a legal thing or if the practices in the UK and Europe are more "friendly". But you seem to support my random theory that the UK does not tend to endorse such traps.

As I vastly prefer live moths I have no opinion on supporting "kill traps", though they definitely do their job, and I was kindly shown that recently with two kill traps and one "hobby" trap in the same area. The kill traps had more than 4x the amount of moths in the morning (178,163 vs. 42). Given that was a single night and any environmental condition could have influenced that, I'm hesitant to claim the absolute benefit, but it seems to point that way.

Re: the battering point, the hawk moths and Saturniids can really make quite a mark, on themselves and on the other moths. Even the larger noctuids can be too flighty for their own good. But I agree that is usually not the case, and I often tell the people here that they probably have misconceptions about "hobby" traps.
 
Last edited:
As Paul and Martin have pointed out, there are areas in entomology where the retention of voucher specimens is necessary. There has been a move in aculeate Hymenoptera to remove a part of the tarsus, before releasing the bee, for bio-chemical and genetic analysis. Apart from the difficulty of performing this in the field, you have the added possibility / probability of contaminating the samples. Given the present rate of advancement in ID knowledge and scientific techniques it may not take long for the collecting of invertebrates to become as rare as for vertebrates but, until then ......
 
I've seen pheremone traps hanging in forest plantations where pest species need to be detected and monitored, mainly in Continental Europe but I don't think they're 'kill traps' but could be wrong?

They may not even have been for moths, coleoptera?

Andy
 
Hi Andy
All sorts of monitoring traps are used for a variety of insects. In my experience they invariably kill the target species, either on a sticky pad or in a bag beneath the trap. I've seen them for both moths and beetles.
Martin
 
I've seen pheremone traps hanging in forest plantations where pest species need to be detected and monitored, mainly in Continental Europe but I don't think they're 'kill traps' but could be wrong?

They may not even have been for moths, coleoptera?

Andy

Ooops. You're right. Apologies. I said that the only kill traps of which I am aware in Britain are the Rothampsted traps. In fact, pest controllers use kill traps in factories, houses, etc for various species including meal moths and clothes moths. I have also seen pheremone kill traps set by the Forestry Commission around Kiltarlitie for Pine-tree Lappet. I'm not sure if they have been used for Gypsy Moth and Oak Processionary?

All the best
 
Last edited:
Lethal pheromone traps are used here for both Gypsy Moths and Pine Processionary Moths by the authorities here.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 9 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top