The false split


Stewart Sexton's recent rant on the practice of splitting moths into micros and macros has got me thinking (not a bad thing, I know). Splitting them is something that I am guilty of. Stewart is quite right in pointing out that there is no sense behind doing so - they are all moths! It is comparable to splitting a list of birds into passerines and non-passerines.In fact, if we are to be pedantic, a pure list of lepidoptera includes butterflies in the order, being placed between micro moths and macro moths in the systematic list (with a few macro moths appearing before the micros to prove what a debacle the micro/macro split really is).

From my own experience, this division really started when I first took an interest in moths. Apart from The Observer's Book of Moths, the first identification guides I possessed were the two volumes of South's which I obtained in 1981. There were no micros illustrated. Therefore I was not in the best position to tackle them, so ignored them.There was a companion volume for pyralids and plume moths, but I kept away from it.

When Bernard Skinner gave the world his ground breaking book in the mid-1980s a whole new generation of moth-ers were born. Again, no micros were dealt with and this meant that all of the recent converts did not have micros on their radar.

My thoughts are that, if you came into moths from birding in the 1980s (and a lot of us did) you are more likely to have the micro/macro divide. Later converts have been blessed with far more micro literature, plus, more importantly, the internet as a resource. Therefore the chances are that they did not come equiped with 'micro-blinkers' - hence no perceived divide.

Comments

Skev said…
Even now Steve, though there is more literature there are still only two books that I have that comprehensively detail all of moths and butterflies together - MBGBI Vol 7 Pt 2 with the life history chart, and the Bradley 2000 Checklist which has no identification text or pictures, just a list of species and numbers. All other works are still either split by micros/macros or for species groups alone.
The only reason I have them as separate lists on my blog link at the moment is that the overall total is too big to manage in one list ;-)
27 February 2012 at 13:33
Stewart said…
I know the feeling Steve. I dabbled with Moths in the mid 90's with only a chinnery Insect guide for company! I could only id about 25% of what I caught, so rapidly packed it all in.

Now though, there is no excuse for all this separation. I contact an expert such as Skev or Leverton or Tams ( I dot and dab so as not to harass anyone!) with a quick email and I get a decision in a very short time. I still like to have ago first though. I post pics on the blog that I have id'd and get put right within the day.

So, I expect to see your moth list rocket forward in 2012 now that you are looking at the lower numbers that have been previously ignored....

Oh and the new micro guide is out soon too...see even the new book split them Doh!
27 February 2012 at 19:43
Steve Gale said…
Skev and Stewart: I think we are the products of how we entered into an interest in moths, plus who our mentors may have been. Funnily enough, I got into them after spending a few days with a very young Sean Clancy at Dungeness. The 'Dungeness moth collective' still openly talk of macros and micros as if they are totally different.
28 February 2012 at 14:48
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Goldfinches and Lavender

Image
We have three medium-sized Lavender bushes in our back garden. Throughout the summer the flowers (which last for several months) are a magnet for insects and give off a most restful aroma. As tempting as it is to cut the dead stems in the autumn, we always leave them, as we know that during the late winter we will get visitors to feed on the seed heads... This video was taken from the kitchen window this morning. We will normally see one or two birds over a few days, but have had up to 14 at once. We never tire of watching them. Lavender is a wonderful plant to have in the garden, with year round natural history benefits. So what are you waiting for? They are readily available at a garden centre close to you right now! There is an historic association with Lavender in this part of northern Surrey and south London. Lavender fields have been harvested for many years, with one particular field close to Woodmansterne being very popular with day trippers. A significant proportion o
Read more

Time to reflect

I normally come up with the title for a post after I have written it. If I'm feeling creative it will be some sort of play on words, or if I'm not then an all-encompassing word or two will do. As for this particular post, and with a few things to discuss, I've written the title first, inspired by having just read a feature about musicians who have used the title of an album as the starting point for their creative exercise. Here goes... Firstly, blogs - yes, this very medium that I am writing in and you are reading from. - what content they derive, the reason that the content exists and what the writer should (or should not) expect from any reader that visits the blog. This was brought into sharp focus by a series of posts to be found here, at Jono Lethbridge's excellent 'Wansted Birder'.   His blogging output has recently included detailed and entertaining reports on his recent overseas trips which have received a bit of flak from certain quarters. None of us b
Read more

To tell it like it is, or not...

Image
I am grateful to Gavin Haig (Not Quite Scilly) who drew my attention to an opinion piece, penned by Matt Phelps, which appeared in the November issue of 'Birdwatch' magazine, entitled 'Positive Approach', which I have now read. In it, he suggests that there is too much negativity being posted on social media regarding the state of our birding world, which is then acting as a deterrent towards a younger generation in adopting conservation and wildlife study. He also suggests that a lot of this negativity is being generated by older birders, and that these old timers keep banging on about the 'good old days' which isn't helpful in encouraging the youth to pick up a pair of binoculars and get out into the field. Does he have a point? Now, I am undeniably an older birder, and I am also guilty of having posted, blogged, written and spoken about the slump in bird and invertebrate numbers. I also like nothing better than to revisit my notebooks and share in the hi
Read more