named Symington, Dr. O.W. Richards of Imperial College, London, and by Le Quesne himself. The 

 butterfly was Heteropterus morpheas (Pallas) to which Le Quesne provided the vernacular name Le Miroir. 

 It holds the distinction of being the only Channel Islands butterfly breeding in the islands that is not on the 

 British Checklist. The species was apparently an accidental introduction into Jersey during the German 

 Occupation years, but had managed to establish itself in a few very small marshy areas on the island. It has 

 never spread to any of the other islands. 



For both annual reports of the islands, a few additional species to the Channel Islands fauna were 

 being added annually. The format for the reports was becoming stabilized, never over long and 

 predominantly emphasising little more than additional species, rare species and regular known migrants. 

 Very little information was ever added on what could be regarded as the common established fauna. With 

 the two main journals in the Channel Islands now publishing regular entomological reports, the period 

 therefore up to 1950, showed that entomological recording in the Channel Islands was thriving, at least in the 

 two larger islands. Though occasional records emerged from Alderney and Sark, the smaller islands as a 

 whole were still very drastically under worked in all groups. The total number of recorded species for all the 

 islands had by the end of 1950 risen to 868. The increase of just 98 species since the end of 1900, may, in 

 comparison to the British faunistic area, appear to roughly meet expectations. Certainly the numbers of 

 collectors and insect recorders that had their home in the islands, or were just visiting, was still relatively 

 small. As far as collecting methods were concerned, the basic techniques in use had not changed all that 

 much from those employed during the previous 50 years. Observations combined with daytime collecting, 

 rearing immature stages, usage of whatever types of lamps was available for night work and sugaring at 

 night, were still the stable methods employed. However; the additional advantage of electric lighting, in 

 whatever format was best applicable, must certainly have increased the possibilities for collecting. The 

 general lighting in towns, from street lights to lighted shop windows, would have extended the period for 

 collectors to patrol and increased the number of sites where collecting would be possible. This would have 

 been like the Harbour area of today on Herm, where a few electric lights are left on throughout the night, but 

 on a much vaster scale in Guernsey and Jersey. On Sark, even up to the present day, night lighting of any 

 sort is scarce, unless you can count the two telephone boxes by The Avenue and one lamp at the top of 

 Harbour Hill. The only other requirements for gaining notable increases for the Lepidoptera fauna by 

 collecting, had not yet arrived, mercury-vapour lights and its many derivative applications. The only other 

 parts of the entomological equation that can be considered, is the amount of time given over to insect 

 collecting, balanced by the enthusiasm needed for these demanding pursuits. In consideration of the events 

 from 1900 to 1950 in Europe and how this influenced the Channel Islands, the increase of 98 species would 

 appear to suggest that the balance of the equation had been satisfactory. 



Awareness of the island's Lepidoptera fauna by 'Mainland' entomologists 



It is important to note that apart from an isolated few notable instances, 'Mainland' English 

 entomologists still only rarely visited the Channel Islands. When they did visit and carry out some 

 collecting, it was invariably during a short holiday and brief notes on their findings would be written up in 

 the standard English entomological journals, or passed on to the residing islands recorders. In the main 

 English lepidopterists were very probably unaware of the fullest potential for the Channel Islands fauna. 

 They realised, no doubt through the many short notes published by the Channel Islands recorders, that 

 several species, which are regarded as rare in England, were actually established in the islands and not very 

 rare. No doubt the presence of these 'rare' species attracted those few who did collect there, but certainly the 

 potential of the Channel Islands Lepidoptera fauna was likely to be far less known to British entomologists 

 than the least accurately documented county in England. Lists that had independently been compiled by Luff 

 in Guernsey and Piquet in Jersey, were consulted and added to by their island successors, but no apparent 

 effort had been made to consolidate their findings for a general Channel Islands faunistic list, which could 

 then be made available to British entomologists at large. If this work had been undertaken, the results had 

 certainly not been made available to general readers. If outside entomologists wished to delve deeply into the 

 Channel Islands fauna, they would have had to painstakingly consult and combine the information from a 

 multiple of published sources. For those who were well acquainted with the fauna of Western Europe, a 

 fairly accurate assumption could be made as to the extent of the Channel Islands Lepidoptera, and even for 

 those whos knowledge was less extensive, a fairly accurate guess could probably be made for at least 60% of 

 what could occur there. For almost a certainty though, there were none who knew the entire fauna more 

 precisely, let alone the status of the species and their island distributions. 



1951-2000 



A synopsis of contributions from the collections and staff of the BMjNH] 



Studies on the Channel Islands insect fauna continued much as before. For the Guernsey Bailiwick, 

 C.J. Shayer continued to produce the Lepidoptera reports from 1951 to 1977. Similarly, for Jersey, W.J. Le 



20 



