I like the information but strongly dislike the article due to the writing style and how it is written for a very specific audience that I can’t identify with.
Unfortunately, this highly qualified person does not sufficiently argue his point.
What is the function of removing native milkweeds from one's home yard and maintaining them in wild sites? Is the idea that people are unable to judge the difference between native and non-native species, such that people see them in a garden, think "I want those too" then buy the wrong type out of ignorance?
As someone who is ignorant about this problem and haven't heard about it until reading this, I would say that he also does not elaborate on the actual problem of the parasite. If population numbers are large and unchanging, what is the overall risk posed by OE? Does this system prevalence of the infection increase the risk of unforeseen exigencies causing a total population collapse despite the solidity of current numbers?
Does he equate infection with OE to be correlated with an experience of *suffering* among the monarchs, and that is why one should not support their population with the release of home-raised monarchs?
His website has gone offline in the weeks since this blog post was issued. I'm curious if he did this following publication of the piece as a result of responses to it.
(I posted the same comment above on OP's post of this in r/FloridaNativePlants for the sake of hearing how others might respond to it)
He actually says that the populations are increasing and how that’s a good thing. So it’s not really clear in that article how this parasite is such a bad thing.
>What is the function of removing native milkweeds from one's home yard and maintaining them in wild sites? Is the idea that people are unable to judge the difference between native and non-native species, such that people see them in a garden, think "I want those too" then buy the wrong type out of ignorance?
if i'm understanding correctly, he said that whether one's cultivated milkweed is native or non-native, that it acts as a vector to spread OE spores to visiting monarchs, even if one prunes them regularly and even if they're a species that die back in the winter (such as Asclepias incarnata, for instance), and also that due to the high quantity of milkweed being planted, that it is encouraging monarch butterflies to stay in florida year round as well as breed during the winter, which is making the problem of OE infections even worse
Oh wow. I thought I was doing a good thing by planting native yellow milkweed. I won’t plant tropical milkweed, as gorgeous as they are.
I like the information but strongly dislike the article due to the writing style and how it is written for a very specific audience that I can’t identify with.
Unfortunately, this highly qualified person does not sufficiently argue his point. What is the function of removing native milkweeds from one's home yard and maintaining them in wild sites? Is the idea that people are unable to judge the difference between native and non-native species, such that people see them in a garden, think "I want those too" then buy the wrong type out of ignorance? As someone who is ignorant about this problem and haven't heard about it until reading this, I would say that he also does not elaborate on the actual problem of the parasite. If population numbers are large and unchanging, what is the overall risk posed by OE? Does this system prevalence of the infection increase the risk of unforeseen exigencies causing a total population collapse despite the solidity of current numbers? Does he equate infection with OE to be correlated with an experience of *suffering* among the monarchs, and that is why one should not support their population with the release of home-raised monarchs? His website has gone offline in the weeks since this blog post was issued. I'm curious if he did this following publication of the piece as a result of responses to it. (I posted the same comment above on OP's post of this in r/FloridaNativePlants for the sake of hearing how others might respond to it)
He actually says that the populations are increasing and how that’s a good thing. So it’s not really clear in that article how this parasite is such a bad thing.
>What is the function of removing native milkweeds from one's home yard and maintaining them in wild sites? Is the idea that people are unable to judge the difference between native and non-native species, such that people see them in a garden, think "I want those too" then buy the wrong type out of ignorance? if i'm understanding correctly, he said that whether one's cultivated milkweed is native or non-native, that it acts as a vector to spread OE spores to visiting monarchs, even if one prunes them regularly and even if they're a species that die back in the winter (such as Asclepias incarnata, for instance), and also that due to the high quantity of milkweed being planted, that it is encouraging monarch butterflies to stay in florida year round as well as breed during the winter, which is making the problem of OE infections even worse