One thing is abundantly clear regarding the potential ESA listing for the Western Monarch: butterflies are not bears. Let me explain.
The Monarch butterfly (Danaus plexippus) has in many ways come to represent conservation efforts in the West, and the broader environmental challenges for wildlife throughout the state. Although year-over-year fluctuation is not uncommon in insect populations, long-term trends clearly show a significant decline (more than 95 percent since the 1980s) in this species.
This decline over the past few decades has led to several calls to list the Monarch butterfly at the Federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973 and the California Endangered Species Act (CESA) level. A goal of the ESA is to “recover” species to the point they no longer require the Act’s protections and can be delisted. This is often accomplished by designating “critical habitat” and imposing restrictions on encounters with the species. However, some top Monarch conservationists believe an ESA listing of the butterfly would do more harm than good.
By the way, if you want a deeper dive topic, check out our webinar, Farming, Monarch Butterflies, and the New EPA Workplan: What Does this Mean for Farmers?
We know that Monarch butterflies are in need of protection and that California is uniquely positioned to conserve critical habitat, so let’s evaluate what ESA listing would mean for Monarchs. The thing is, the ESA was really developed and expanded to protect large, conspicuous animals, particularly birds and mammals (which, by the way, constitute less than 1 percent of animal species. Only 4 percent of listed endangered animal species are insects, despite insects making up over 72 percent of global animal diversity). According to the Xerces Society, “unlike the American alligator and the brown pelican success stories, no insect has been taken off the list because numbers have recovered.” Why is this the case?
Size and Space: Larger mammals such as bears have fewer, larger and more defined habitats with distinct territories. Large tracts of land can be more easily identified, conserved and monitored, unlike the numerous small and disparate habitats required for migratory insects. It’s also a lot easier to spot, count and protect (or do an autopsy on) a bear than it is to coordinate and seek out many tiny insects moving and migrating through countless overwintering and breeding habitats throughout the state.
Ecosystem and Environment: Butterflies have specific and fragile habitat needs, dependent on particular host plants, like milkweed for Monarchs. Small changes to these plant populations, temperature and humidity environmental factors, due to climate change for example, can affect migration, reproduction and survival. Due to the shorter lifespans and rapid reproduction, insect populations can fluctuate dramatically, making population trends more difficult to track and persist. Larger animals can more easily adapt to gradual changes in their environment and live longer with multiple opportunities for reproduction, allowing for more resilience against climate change and other extreme factors.
Conservation and Collaborators: Effective conservation efforts for the Monarch butterfly will require significant community buy-in. Due to the dispersed and numerous habitat requirements, education and voluntary conservation programs that encourage farmers and landowners to incorporate milkweed and other native plants into their landscapes is the best allocation of compliance and enforcement resources.
While the ESA can shield listed species from significant harm, it does not directly mandate or compel private citizens to take positive conservation actions on behalf of these species. Some conservationists believe that focusing on voluntary habitat restoration and collaborations with farming communities would be more effective than regulatory approaches and would be more accessible without the regulatory red tape.
Professor of Entomology Dr. Dan Rubinoff says, “Well-meaning organizations and agencies should continue their efforts to bolster Monarch populations and engage the public in the voluntary conservation of one of the few insects which has managed to capture the public’s sympathies and admiration…Federal listing will encumber research, cause chaos and confusion in a public used to growing and interacting with the species, and ultimately threaten the Endangered Species Act, as the untenable listing of the Monarch will initiate concessions and exceptions to account for its presence in backyards, parks, and schools.”
Primary threats to Western Monarch butterflies surround habitat loss as the key factor. This is due to urbanization and herbicides impacting milkweed reproductive sites and development and forestry in overwintering sites. Climate change has certainly played a role and will change where and when Monarchs will migrate and reproduce.
Given the flagship role of Monarch butterflies in insect and pollinator conservation, and ESA listing this of species could provide crucial protections for its habitat and catalyze broader conservation efforts for insects. However, adequate resources and assurances to good actors are critical to getting the required habitat restoration and creation, particularly planting milkweed and nectar plants. Farmers and farmland play a vital role to conserve Western Monarch butterflies by expanding vital breeding and foraging habitat.
There is a clear need for action to protect Monarch butterflies. Whether this important species is listed at the end of 2024 or not, it is critical that stakeholders work together to enact effective change. Including farmers in this conversation, providing community resources and education, and protecting the good actors who are stewarding these important habitats will be key to supporting the future of this species. Our farmers have been working hard to implement biodiversity and support sustainable agriculture and are looking forward to a brighter future for Monarch butterflies.
