[TN-Butterflies] Re: NABA/BAMONA
- From: "Bill Haley" <wgh@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <owlshill@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, <tn-butterflies@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 11 May 2009 15:07:36 -0400
This year's cost for the NABA annual report listing all butterfly counts
from North America is $7 for NABA members, $11 for non-members. This
document will probably list the results of 500 counts. As Nancy states,
you can order it from any count compiler and pay at the time you are
helping with a count. There is a $3 fee per counter if you participate
in a NABA count.
Our next scheduled count in the Chattanooga area is Saturday, June 13,
Tennessee River Gorge. Anyone is welcome to help, you don't have to be
an expert.
Bill Haley
Chattanooga, TN
Hamilton County
-----Original Message-----
From: tn-butterflies-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:tn-butterflies-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of owlshill
Sent: Monday, May 11, 2009 9:36 AM
To: tn-butterflies@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [TN-Butterflies] NABA/BAMONA
Folks,
Both Ed and Steve make good points about data. As a compiler of NABA
counts
for several years, I would like to point out that getting the NABA count
data each year requires paying a nominal fee (last year, $6) for the
publication. You can order it from NABA or from any compiler. If you
participate in a count, you can order it at the time you sign up and pay
your participation fee. If you want data beyond that, you then know who
to
go to as all compilers must list contact info.
NABA has done a wonderful job of interesting the public in butterflies;
BAMONA is a tremendous resource for all - casual viewers and scientists
alike. Let's not have a spat!
Nancy Garden
Secretary
Middle Tennessee Chapter, NABA
----- Original Message -----
From: <TN-Butterflies@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "tn-butterflies digest users" <ecartis@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, May 11, 2009 12:06 AM
Subject: tn-butterflies Digest V2 #92
> tn-butterflies Digest Sun, 10 May 2009 Volume: 02 Issue: 092
>
> In This Issue:
> [TN-Butterflies] Re: A two-white day at Kentucky Manor - May
> [TN-Butterflies] Why not "Butterflies I've Seen"?
> [TN-Butterflies] May 9, Polk County Appalachian Butterflie
> [TN-Butterflies] FOY - Hamilton County
> [TN-Butterflies] submission of butterfly data: bamona vs. bi
> [TN-Butterflies] Blount Co. FOYs
> [TN-Butterflies] FOY Greene County
> [TN-Butterflies] FOY's for Washington Co
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> From: "Michael Lee Bierly" <mlbierly@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: [TN-Butterflies] Re: A two-white day at Kentucky Manor - May
9,
> 2009
> Date: Sun, 10 May 2009 08:02:21 -0500
>
> Content-Type: text/plain;
> charset="us-ascii"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> Sitting on the front step for a nana second I thought Cabbage White as
=
> the
> 'fly came by close, then saw the flight was erratic and fast, faster
it
> seemed than Cabbage, and it had all these black markings on it. The =
> female
> Checkered White made my day and it was already later afternoon. This
was =
> a
> surprise for the yard. Hadn't really thought of the possibility of it
> occurring. This was the seventh identified species for Kentucky Manor
=
> for
> the season and a new one for me. A female Cabbage White had already =
> ventured
> by so this made a two-white day at Kentucky Manor.=20
> =20
> =20
> May, 9, 2009. Kentucky Manor, 5211 Kentucky Avenue, Nashville,
Davidson
> County, TN=20
> 360934N (36.15944) and 0865102W (-86.85055)
> =20
> Checkered White - 1 female; digital.
> Cabbage White - 2, at least one female; digital.
> =20
> Michael Lee Bierly, Nashville, Davidson County, TN
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> From: "LeGrand Family" <elegrand@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: [TN-Butterflies] Why not "Butterflies I've Seen"?
> Date: Sun, 10 May 2009 08:34:20 -0500
>
> In regard to the posting a couple of days ago by Steve Stedman on
BAMONA's
> desire for all butterfly records on special EXCEL spreadsheets, this
would
> have been an excellent idea had not NABA already established the very
user
> friendly site, "Butterflies I've Seen"
> (http://www.nababis.org/servlets/Sightings). This seems to be the
> butterflier's answer to eBird; i.e., why would you use anything else
for
> your records?
>
> Sorry, but I don't know about the politics of the two organizations,
but
> it
> would seem like BAMONA should work with Butterlies I've Seen to
improve
> it,
> get the data (ask for local reviewers), and encourage people to use
it.
>
> -Ed LeGrand
> Cumberland County
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sun, 10 May 2009 11:20:00 -0400
> From: "J. Basham" <jbasham@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: [TN-Butterflies] May 9, Polk County Appalachian Butterflies
>
> It was good to get out for a while on Saturday. The sun shone between
> thunderstorms just long enough for a few butterflies to get out and
wing
> around. Stephen Johnson and I had our first Appalachian Azure of the
> year, a nice male, and some more beautiful Appalachian Tiger
> Swallowtails. Found a new colony of Golden-banded Skippers, saw 32 of
> them, and estimate 200-300 individuals on the mountainside. Was
lucky
> enough to find my first ever Rare Spring Moth, had seen the Common
> Spring Moth, but this little fellow was black with blue jeweling,
> fantastic. Reminds one of some of the blue, spread wing skippers in
> Mexico and Central America. Had the last Cobweb Skipper of the year.
> It's amazing how almost unrecognizable they become at the end of their
> season.
> Look at the difference in size and color between the two Appalachians
> and the two Easterns in the one photo. Also note the almost total
lack
> of blue on dorsal hindwing on the two Appalachians. The Appalachians
are
> a much paler yellow as well.
>
> Julius Basham
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> From: "David Spicer" <dspicer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: [TN-Butterflies] FOY - Hamilton County
> Date: Sun, 10 May 2009 11:39:17 -0400
>
> I had a Hackberry Emperor flitting around the deck out back this
morning.
>
> Dave Spicer
> Ooltewah, TN
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> From: "Steve Stedman" <birdsongteam@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: [TN-Butterflies] submission of butterfly data: bamona vs. bis
> Date: Sun, 10 May 2009 13:43:32 -0500
>
> As most of you know, the Butterflies and Moths of North America
(BAMONA)
> website presents information about the distribution of lepidoptera
that is
> probably more accurate and more current than are the distributional
data
> available at any other online or published butterfly (or moth) source.
> BAMONA provides distributional data down to the county (for US) and
state
> (for Mexico) level about each of the species covered by the website
(and
> the list of species gets longer each year, mainly as more and more
moth
> species are added to the database). Efforts to include BAMONA
coverage of
> the Canadian provinces are also proceeding. If you were to look for a
> website that provided distributional information of comparable
> completeness and accuracy for any other large group of related taxa in
> North America, you would probably look in vain. Certainly no such
website
> is available for the birds of North America. The only competitor
might be
> the website for North American dragonflies and da
> mselflies--which as a group is far smaller than the group of
butterflies
> and moths.
> BAMONA is in the process of increasing its coverage of the continental
lep
> fauna from a mainly distribution-related focus to one that encompasses
> distribution, abundance, and trend analysis, as well as even more life
> history related issues on down the road. To this end, sources of
> abundance data are being sought that offer a fairly high degree of
> accuracy, to complement the fairly high degree of accuracy that BAMONA
> distribution data have had and continue to have based on its
two-tiered
> system of review (i.e., all BAMONA records pass through a state
reviewer
> and then pass through a continental reviewer before they are entered
into
> the database).
>
> A seemingly logical place for BAMONA personnel to look for abundance
data
> about butterflies is within the archives of the Butterflies I've Seen
> (BIS) database maintained by the North American Butterfly Association
> (NABA). I am not sure how long NABA has had BIS in operation, but
> probably at least a decade, so there are many data housed there. The
> problem with the BIS program is that the data entered into it have
never
> been the subject of any kind of review, so there may be considerable
> inconsistency in the quality of the archived data. In order for BIS
data
> to become useful to BAMONA, a thorough vetting of all the data would
need
> to be accomplished. This is a large but seemingly doable task,
presuming
> that both sides are willing to make it happen. The question then
becomes
> finding out if both sides are indeed willing to make that effort and,
if
> they are, getting a process in place to vet the data. I will see what
I
> can learn about prospects for mutual cooperation on thi
> s issue from both organizations, whose politics are not entirely known
to
> me--but what little I do know does not lead me to believe that such a
> vetting could be put in place quickly (pehaps not for several years).
>
> In the meantime, we can wait for BAMONA and BIS to become reconciled
to
> one another data-wise or we can begin to supply BAMONA with the data
it
> needs to begin its transformation from a website focused on
distribution
> to a website focused on distribution, abundance, and trend analysis
(and
> much more). Given this choice, I say let's start supplying BAMONA
with
> the kind of properly vetted data it wants and hope that NABA and its
BIS
> data can be brought into the equation as soon as possible.
>
> Besides its BIS data, NABA has also become responsible for the Fourth
of
> July butterfly counts across the continent. Here is a source of
butterfly
> abundance data that HAVE been vetted already. Data from each NABA
> butterfly count go through the hands of a compiler; then the data
receive
> a regional review--with our own Bill Haley from Chattanooga serving in
> this capacity for all the counts from Tennessee (and Kentucky and West
> Virginia) and with Rita Venable, one of Tennessee's most respected
field
> butterfliers, sometimes assisting Bill in his reviewing efforts; and
then
> the data go through a continental review before being published. The
> problem with getting the NABA butterfly count data to BAMONA is that
NABA
> itself has butterfly experts who are analyzing the butterfly count
data
> for what light they can shed on changes in distribution and trends in
> butterfly populations. Given its investment in the butterfly counts,
NABA
> might have qualms about sharing the butterfly count
> data with BAMONA. Or it might not; I just do not know.
>
> Let me say that I have been encouraging Tennessee butterfliers to use
the
> NABA-supported BIS butterfly archive for several years, and I will
> continue to do that. But, given that I have not seen much result from
the
> BIS program in the way of expanded knowledge about, or information
access
> to, butterflies during the past five years, I view BIS as mainly being
a
> way to safeguard one's personal butterfly data. Given what I have
seen
> BAMONA do on a daily basis with the butterfly data going to it in the
way
> of expanded distributional knowledge of butterflies and moths, I am
> inclined to want to share all my more meaningful butterfly counts with
> them as well.
>
> How we archive and share our butterfly data (i.e., with BIS and
BAMONA) is
> not an either/or issue; both ways of perpetuating our butterfly data
have
> value, and I encourage all Tennessee butterfliers to submit to each of
> these worthy programs.
>
> Steve Stedman
> Cookeville (Putnam County)
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> From: "tom howe" <blountbirder@xxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: [TN-Butterflies] Blount Co. FOYs
> Date: Sun, 10 May 2009 18:05:53 -0400
>
> Blount Co FOYs
> 05-09-09
>
>
>
> Viceroy at Whites Mill Refuge
>
> Zabulon Skipper at the house in Alcoa
>
>
>
> Tom Howe
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sun, 10 May 2009 21:26:30 -0400 (EDT)
> From: Alice Loftin / Don Miller <pandion@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: [TN-Butterflies] FOY Greene County
>
> May 10, 2009
> First-of-year sightings for Greene County today:
>
> American Copper
> Red-spotted Purple
> Sachem
>
> Don Miller
> Greeneville, Greene Co., TN
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Subject: [TN-Butterflies] FOY's for Washington Co
> Date: Sun, 10 May 2009 21:55:10 -0400
> From: dnldhlt@xxxxxxx
>
> SUN 10 MAY 2009
> circa 11 am
> Cherokee Rd., Washington Co., TN
>
> Sachem - FOY
> Zabulon Skipper - FOY
> Pearl Crescent - FOY
> Red-spotted Purple - FOY
> Carolina Satyr - FOY
> Little Wood Satyr - FOY
>
> Don Holt
> Johnson City, TN
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of tn-butterflies Digest V2 #92
> ***********************************
>
The FAQ can be found by logging in at
//www.freelists.org/cgi-bin/lsg2.cgi/l=tn-butterflies
Please report any abuse or questions about this list to:
kjchilds@xxxxxxxxxx
Users can unsubscribe from this list by sending email to
tn-butterflies-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe'
in the Subject field.
The FAQ can be found by logging in at
//www.freelists.org/cgi-bin/lsg2.cgi/l=tn-butterflies
Please report any abuse or questions about this list to:
kjchilds@xxxxxxxxxx
Users can unsubscribe from this list by sending email to
tn-butterflies-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe'
in the Subject field.
Other related posts:
