Vinnie2000:



Only those People closer to nature can say they have seen one recently..I.e.Farmers, Villagers,etc..

Overrated Slum, Potopoto republic, Brown roof City dwellers etc.. can NOT say they have..

FreeSpirited:
Truth is butterfly is no more common, at least for me, it's being a while I saw them. I don't care anyway.
The question is, what's are the importance or essence of having butterfly around? Do they affect us or our environment in any way? What is their contribution that should necessitate their conservation?

Conservationist should educate us. To me, all these animals have life-cycle and they can't be on Earth forever. No amount of conservation policy will change that..
And what if by conservation we are even disrupting the natural plan and system that set limit to the existential cycle of certain animals and organism? Even human spp have evolved and disappeared at some point. Do we blame evolution or nature?
.
So, I want to put it to conservationist who say we should conserve this and that...imagine all animal spp never went on extinct, won't the world be overpopulated with animals today?
.
Imagine Dinosaurs were still around and no spp of dinosaur, snake, lion, whale is gone...how will the world cope with such volumnous density of dangerous spp of animals?
.
If u say human is the cause of disappearance of animals today? well, animals did disappear at some point, at least before earliest human civilization dinosaurs and thousands of animal spp already gone extinct, so who do u blame for that? Natural disasters?
Then since it can't be stopped, it must be part of natural cycle as well as human civilization which is blamed for decimating certain spp of organisms..About animal conservation, I feel there's so much needless noise and fuss about it.
Though we can document, keep the gene and specimen of certain animals for reserch and posterity, this doesn't require so much noise and fund as being wasted on conservation today.
Many developed country choose to conserve certain animal and leave others cos obviously they can't conserve all spp of animals..so what criteria are they employing in making this choice.?
Conservationist should address all those points and convince us why we should keep promoting conservation for a kind of animals while living others to perish

FreeSpirited:
Truth is butterfly is no more common, at least for me, it's being a while I saw them. I don't care anyway.
The question is, what's are the importance or essence of having butterfly around? Do they affect us or our environment in any way? What is their contribution that should necessitate their conservation?

Conservationist should educate us. To me, all these animals have life-cycle and they can't be on Earth forever. No amount of conservation policy will change that..
And what if by conservation we are even disrupting the natural plan and system that set limit to the existential cycle of certain animals and organism? Even human spp have evolved and disappeared at some point. Do we blame evolution or nature?
.
So, I want to put it to conservationist who say we should conserve this and that...imagine all animal spp never went on extinct, won't the world be overpopulated with animals today?
.
Imagine Dinosaurs were still around and no spp of dinosaur, snake, lion, whale is gone...how will the world cope with such volumnous density of dangerous spp of animals?
.
If u say human is the cause of disappearance of animals today? well, animals did disappear at some point, at least before earliest human civilization dinosaurs and thousands of animal spp already gone extinct, so who do u blame for that? Natural disasters?
Then since it can't be stopped, it must be part of natural cycle as well as human civilization which is blamed for decimating certain spp of organisms..About animal conservation, I feel there's so much needless noise and fuss about it.
Though we can document, keep the gene and specimen of certain animals for reserch and posterity, this doesn't require so much noise and fund as being wasted on conservation today.
Many developed country choose to conserve certain animal and leave others cos obviously they can't conserve all spp of animals..so what criteria are they employing in making this choice.?
Conservationist should address all those points and convince us why we should keep promoting conservation for a kind of animals while living others to perish

Omicron007:
To be honest, I dislike insects a lot but the butterfly stands out for me.

From the visibly crafted patterns to the brightly coloured wings and the fluttering flights, the insect is a beauty to behold.

Growing up in the beautiful neighbourhood of Rayfield, Jos, I easily remember how me and my estate neighbours used to play with different species of the beloved insect on the beautiful green lawn.

However, from reasons ranging from deforestation to climate change and others, butterflies are fast becoming scarce and rare to find these days.

For a little scientific/biological background: There are more than 28,000 species of butterflies throughout the world.
These insects live and breed in diverse habitats such as the mangroves, salt marshes, lowland forested areas, wetlands, mountain zones, and in grasslands.

Butterflies tend to be habitat-specific meaning that some of the species will only be found in specific places such as only in the coastal areas or only in the mountain zones. The major role of butterflies in the ecosystem is that of pollination.

Butterflies are also called the wild indicators of an ecosystem. The reason for this is that they can provide a picture regarding the health of an ecosystem at any particular time.

Butterflies are naturally responsible for increasing the biodiversity of an ecosystem. An environment that appeals to and attracts butterflies would also be fertile for the growth of plants and serve as a suitable habitat for other animals.
Among the animals that are attracted to habitats belonging to butterflies are other invertebrates.

When was the last time you saw a butterfly?