National analysis finds America's butterflies are disappearing at 'catastrophic' rate

ABC News - Mar 6th, 2025

A comprehensive study published in the journal Science reveals that butterfly populations in the contiguous United States have decreased by 22% since the year 2000, with an average annual decline of 1.3%. Researchers, including Nick Haddad from Michigan State University, attribute this decline to a combination of climate change, habitat destruction, and insecticide use. The study, which aggregated data from nearly 77,000 surveys, highlights that 114 species are experiencing significant declines, with certain species like the red admiral and American lady suffering reductions of up to 58%. The Southwest has been particularly hard hit, with over half the butterfly population lost in regions like Arizona and Texas.

The implications of this decline are profound, as butterflies play crucial roles in pollination and serve as indicators of environmental health. Experts not involved in the study, such as David Wagner and Anurag Agrawal, underscore the broader message that the health of butterflies reflects the health of broader ecosystems, including human well-being. Despite the grim findings, the study suggests hope through habitat restoration and local environmental actions. The research serves as both a warning and a call to action to address the intertwined threats of pesticide use, climate change, and habitat loss, which are impacting not just butterflies but potentially other insect populations worldwide.

Biodiversity Habitat Loss Butterfly Decline Nick Haddad Climate Change Impact Insecticides Insect Population Study Science Journal

Story submitted by Fairstory

RATING

8.6

Fair Story

Consider it well-founded

The article provides a comprehensive and accurate account of the decline in butterfly populations in the United States, supported by credible sources and expert opinions. It effectively communicates the scientific findings in a clear and accessible manner, making it engaging and informative for a general audience. The article addresses a timely and relevant issue, highlighting the broader environmental implications and the interconnectedness of climate change, habitat loss, and insecticide use.

While the article is well-balanced and includes diverse expert perspectives, it could benefit from further exploration of specific conservation efforts and policy initiatives. This would provide readers with a more comprehensive understanding of potential solutions and the complexities involved in addressing the issue.

Overall, the article successfully raises awareness of the decline in butterfly populations and its broader implications, encouraging readers to consider their own impact on the environment and engage with conservation efforts. Its high-quality sources, clarity, and public interest value make it a strong piece of journalism that effectively informs and engages its audience.

Accuracy

The news story provides a detailed account of the decline in butterfly populations in the United States, citing a study published in the journal Science. The claim that butterfly populations have been declining at an average rate of 1.3% per year since 2000 is supported by the study's findings. The article accurately reports that 114 species are in significant decline, while only nine have shown an increase. This aligns with the data from the study, which is considered to be the most comprehensive analysis of butterfly populations to date.

The article attributes the decline to insecticides, climate change, and habitat loss, with insecticides identified as the primary cause. This claim is consistent with previous research indicating the harmful effects of insecticides on insect populations. The specific mention of the Southwest region experiencing the largest decline provides precise geographical context, which is corroborated by the study's findings.

However, the article could benefit from more precise verification of the decline rates for specific species and regions, as well as further exploration of the relative impact of each contributing factor. Overall, the factual claims in the article are well-supported by credible sources, making it highly accurate.

Balance

The article provides a balanced view of the issue by including perspectives from multiple experts in the field of entomology. It features comments from both the study's authors and independent experts who were not involved in the research, such as David Wagner and Anurag Agrawal. This inclusion of diverse viewpoints helps to provide a well-rounded understanding of the issue.

While the article focuses primarily on the decline of butterfly populations, it also touches on the broader implications for ecosystems and human well-being. By mentioning the role of butterflies as pollinators and indicators of ecosystem health, the article highlights the interconnectedness of environmental issues.

However, the article could have included more perspectives from stakeholders directly involved in conservation efforts or those affected by the decline, such as farmers or local communities. This would provide a more comprehensive view of the issue's impact and the potential solutions being considered.

Clarity

The article is well-written and easy to understand, with a clear and logical structure. It begins with a concise summary of the study's findings, followed by detailed explanations of the contributing factors to the butterfly decline and the broader implications for ecosystems and human well-being.

The language used is straightforward and accessible, making the complex scientific information understandable to a general audience. The inclusion of specific examples, such as the decline of the red admiral and American lady butterflies, helps to illustrate the broader trends discussed in the article.

The article effectively uses quotes from experts to provide depth and context, enhancing the reader's comprehension of the issue. Overall, the clarity of the article is high, making it an informative and engaging read.

Source quality

The article relies on high-quality sources, including a study published in a reputable scientific journal, Science. The study's co-authors, such as Nick Haddad and Collin Edwards, are credible experts in their fields, providing authoritative insights into the issue.

The inclusion of comments from independent experts like David Wagner and Anurag Agrawal, who were not involved in the study, adds to the credibility of the article by offering external validation of the study's findings. These experts are affiliated with respected institutions, further enhancing the reliability of their contributions.

The article also references previous research on the impact of insecticides, supporting its claims with established scientific evidence. Overall, the use of credible and authoritative sources contributes to the article's strong source quality.

Transparency

The article is transparent in its presentation of the study's findings and methodology. It clearly states that the analysis was based on 76,957 surveys from 35 monitoring programs, providing readers with a sense of the study's scope and data collection process.

The article also discloses the financial support received by the Associated Press for climate and environmental coverage, which is a commendable practice that enhances transparency. However, the article could provide more detailed information about the specific methodologies used in the study, such as how the data was analyzed or how the surveys were conducted.

While the article mentions the potential for habitat restoration and conservation efforts, it does not delve into the specific strategies or initiatives currently underway. Providing more information on these aspects would offer readers a clearer understanding of the potential solutions and their feasibility.