2) This morning I remembered to take my fold up sweep net to confirm what I was seeing flying around were in fact Manchester Treble-bar (Carsia sororiata). This is because at this time they are flying endlessly and only occasionally settle.
3) I caught in excess of 15, and all those I thought looked liked Manchester Treble-bars, were indeed this species.
4) The impressive thing is the sheer numbers of them. In the area I was in, there must have been hundreds of them on the wing. They appear to be male moths patrolling around patches of Cranberry in very wet and boggy areas.
5) I think the mistaken assumption given how few turn up in traps, and are disturbed when you are looking from, that they must occur in quite low numbers. This proves not to be the case.
6) They are only active for about the first 1 1/2 hours after sunrise, with the numbers on the wing rapidly reducing after this. Whilst they do cross the drier path, most of the activity is confined to these very wet boggy patches.
7) This would explain why only small numbers get disturbed, fly up and are seen during the day. The wet areas they frequent are too wet to walk on, so you are only seeing outliers away from the main centres of their activity.
8) There were also good numbers of Purple-borded Gold (Idaea muricata) on the wing. Their activity seemed to be very similar to MTB, in the same areas. Apparently confirming that on Whixall Moss at least, that Cranberry is their main larval food …nsandwhixallmossdiaries.wordpress.com/2018/06/24/pur….
9) Presumably MTB and PBG are really night flying moths, that continue to fly into the first hour or two of light in the morning. And not really day flying moths, as they only fly when disturbed. butterfly-conservation.org/moths/manchest…
10) I think an understanding of this behaviour will make it easier to locate them and to estimate their numbers, because other sampling methods produce low numbers detected, which is misleading given the numbers they actually seem to live in.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
1) What if our system of governance was not what it seems? That in fact our leaders were in fact confidence tricksters ruthlessly exploiting the public for their own ends, and the benefit of others in their cabal. That it was an intergenerational scam? en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confidenc…
2) I have played with this idea for decades. At first it seems a preposterous proposition. That I am quite mad for even contemplating it. But bear with me.
3) Let's go with the Wikipedia description.
"A confidence trick is an attempt to defraud a person or group after first gaining their trust. Confidence tricks exploit victims using their credulity, naïveté, compassion, vanity, irresponsibility, and greed. ..."
1) This point is so well put that I want to start a mini thread to discuss, and maybe start a discussion about why this basic fact is not being acknowledged.
Because of the climate crisis there is no future where things are not going to be radically changed and different.
3) I've always known what change is coming whether you like it or not, because I have been saying this for a very long time. However, my impression is that no national or world leader, no politician, very few journalists, really understand what this means.
Please note this is one of a series of complaints I made about the @Guardian claiming that 2C was an internationally agree safe level of warming, which it was not. It is difficult retrieving them now, but some definitely used the SEI reference. theguardian.com/environment/20…
Here is a screenshot of my comment. I am not trying to single out either the @Guardian or the @BBC. What I am illustrating is that over the last 30 years the media and governments have seriously misled the public into believing that 2C of warming was safe.
2) In an otherwise good article, @RHarrabin bizarrely concludes.
"What do we imagine things will be like with a rise of 2C, which was until recently considered to be a relatively "safe" level of change? " bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-…
3) If you understand the history of the 2C figure as regards to climate change, and how it was defined and explained, it is impossible to understand how any informed person thought it was a safe figure. carbonbrief.org/two-degrees-th…
The failure to give this thread much notice or even recognise what I said, massively illustrates the main problem as regards the ecological and climate crisis i.e. that there is virtually no ecological understanding of the crisis we face.
As a society we have become totally disconnected from the natural systems that keep us alive, and there is virtually no understanding of ecosystem processes, what biodiversity is, and how it sustains us and makes our lives possible.
Just a week ago I started a thread on why it is essential to use the term biodiversity for biodiversity, and not nature or wildlife as a euphemism for biodiversity, as they refer to something else and are ill defined terms that mislead the public.
1) Most old growth natural forest in the world has already been destroyed through clear felling. I want to explain why replanting does not replace these incredible ecosystems, but just creates a deceiving facsimile of what was there previously.
2) Old growth forests are unique habitats. An incredible interlinked habitat develops over many thousands of years. Their soils are unique, as is the incredible fungal networks which lie in the soils of these old growth forests.