It is certain, the insects have a very significant role in our ecosystems, at the base of the food chains, and also of invaluable indicators of the health of the biotopes. But the protection of the insects makes sense only if their biotopes are protected, and not insects themselves. Protection such as it currently exists does not slow down the bulldozers of the companies which have the sufficient capital, but on the other hand it harms to the entomologists amateurs who do not have any more the statutory duty to make their studies.

Indeed, the natural zones disappear gradually because not enough economically valuable, to build constructions, roads, ..., and primary forests in the tropical areas become deserts. The pesticides and weedkillers form part of the agricultural routine, killing at the same time the mature insects and depriving their larvae of their food. But misfortune with the scientist who dares to walk a net to the hand in a natural zone! Not only it can be described as anybody " odd ", but moreover it risks a strong fine to dare to capture a species known as protected.

Paradoxically, to protect a biotope, it is necessary to classify that animal or vegetable species as "protected". Therefore to determine the presence of such species and to call upon the scientists specialists, ornithologists, entomologists and others. I personally took part in such studies in France. But once the biotope protected, which is very well, collecting specimens is prohibited there, except trying to have from a bureaucrate not knowing anything in entomology, a seldom granted special licence. And finally, the natural zones become " prohibited " and the entomologists cannot do their studies freely any more. It is really necessary to be passionned to continue in this way, or to be out of the law... And I feel pessimism with the future of amateurism in entomology. By the way, do you that the majority of the specimens which you could see in the museums result from private collections amateurs...?

Do you also know that certain butterflies are protected as well as elephant ivory ? The list of the protected species is updated mainly by the CITES. For these species, special licences of import and/or export are necessary. My personal idea of this convention is the following one: to destroy the habitats of the species protected in the Philippines, Brazil or elsewhere is not within the framework of convention (that involve billions of specimens...), the only constraint to import these species is economic (to have a CITES licence is equivalent paying a few tens of US $), and the species protected by this convention are over collected by not scientific people that want to make money with them on the black market.

The amateur entomologists don't want to be the scapegoats !!