DOCSLIB.ORG

Statement of Need and Reasonableness

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Statement of Need and Reasonableness This document is made available electronically by the Minnesota Legislative Reference Library as part of an ongoing digital archiving project. http://www.leg.state.mn.us/lrl/sonar/sonar.asp STATEMENT OF NEED AND REASONABLENESS In the Matter of Proposed Amendment of Minnesota Rules, Chapter 6134: Endangered and Threatened Species STATE OF MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES DIVISION OF FISH AND WILDLIFE December 4, 1995 STATE OF MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES DIVISION OF FISH AND WILDLIFE In The Matter Of Proposed Amendment Of Minnesota Rules, Chapter 6134: Endangered and Threatened Species STATEMENT OF NEED AND REASONABLENESS General Statement Introduction Minnesota’s List of Endangered, Threatened, and Special Concern Species was created in 1984 and has remain unchanged since. The List, created under Minnesota’s Endangered and Threatened Species Statute, draws attention to species that are at greatest risk of extinction within the state; special regulations are applied to those listed as endangered or threatened. By alerting resource managers and the public to species in jeopardy, activities can be reviewed and prioritized to help preserve the diversity and abundance of Minnesota’s flora and fauna. Because of the importance of this List in influencing resource use and management activities in Minnesota, it is critical that it reflect the most current information regarding the distribution, abundance, and security of species within the state. In this document, the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) describes and explains the changes it proposes to make to the status of 299 mammals, birds, reptiles and amphibians, fishes, mollusks, jumping spiders, butterflies and moths, caddisflies, tiger beetles, leafhoppers, dragonflies, vascular plants, lichens, and fungi. History of Minnesota’s Endangered and Threatened Species Statute Minnesota law pertaining to endangered species dates back to Laws of Minnesota 1971, Ch. 825, which listed several animal species as endangered, and granted authority to the DNR’s commissioner to add or delete animals by rule. Laws of Minnesota 1974, Ch. 465 added a threatened category to the statute and dropped the listing of specific species in statute. Laws of Minnesota 1981, Ch. 285 added the special concern category to the statute, and added plants to the statute’s protection. The statute, entitled Protection of Threatened and Endangered Species was codified into its current form (Minn. Stat., sec. 84.0895) in 1986 (Laws of Minnesota 1986, Ch. 386, art. 4, s. 9), and has not been amended since then. Responsibility for administration of this statute is delegated by the DNR commissioner to the DNR’s Section of Wildlife. Content of Minnesota’s Endangered and Threatened Species Statute and Associated Rule Minnesota's Endangered and Threatened Species Statute provides protection to species at risk of extinction within Minnesota, and reflects the Legislature’s intent that the DNR manage these species in such a way as to prevent their extinction and restore their viability within the bounds of the state, and thus maintain all elements of the state’s native flora and fauna. The statute identifies those activities from which an endangered species is protected ("... a person may not take, import, transport, or sell any portion of an endangered species...") (Minn. Stat., sec. 84.0895, subd. 1), specifies that violation of this prohibition is a misdemeanor (Minn. Stat., sec. 84.0895, subd. 9), and authorizes peace officers or conservation officers to enforce the statute (Minn. Stat., secs. 84.0894 and 84.0895, subd. 6). It authorizes the DNR commissioner to conduct studies to support species conservation (Minn. Stat., sec. 84.0895, subd. 4), to develop programs, orders, and rules to recover species from threatened or endangered status (Minn. Stat., sec. 84.0895, subd. 5), and to designate species as endangered, threatened, or of special concern (Minn. Stat., sec. 84.0895, subd. 3, see below). While the statute provides protection from prohibited acts to all endangered or threatened species, species of special concern receive no such protection. Proposed Amendment of Minnesota Rules, Chapter 6134: Endangered and Threatened Species Statement of Need and Reasonableness: December 4, 1995 Page 1 The statute also provides exemptions from its stated prohibitions for: 1) plants on land classified for property tax purposes as class 2a or 2b agricultural land, or on ditches and roadways; 2) noxious weeds designated as such under statute or weeds otherwise designated as troublesome by the Department of Agriculture; 3) noxious weed control; 4) the application of pesticides or other agricultural chemicals on land adjacent to class 3 or 3b agricultural land; and 5) the accidental taking of endangered and threatened plants where the existence of the plant is not known at the time of the taking (Minn. Stat., sec. 84.0895, subd. 2). It also provides for the capture or destruction of a protected species, without permit, to avoid an immediate and demonstrable threat to human life or property (Minn. Stat., sec. 84.0895, subd. 7(c)). Further, the statute authorizes the DNR commissioner to issue permits allowing the prohibited acts if: 1) the act is for purposes of zoological, educational, or scientific study; 2) the act enhances the propagation or survival of the affected species; 3) the act prevents injury to persons or property (provided that all alternatives, including live trapping and transplantation, have been evaluated and rejected); or 4) the social and economic benefits of the act outweigh the harm caused by it (Minn. Stat., sec. 84.0895, subd. 7). The statute also authorizes the DNR commissioner to prescribe conditions to propagate a species or subspecies (Minn. Stat., sec. 84.0895, subd. 7(b)), and allows the commissioner to issue permits for forest management (Minn. Stat., sec. 84.0895, subd. 7(d)). Finally, the statute specifies that it does not apply retroactively to, or prohibit importation into the state of species (or their parts) that are legally acquired from elsewhere (Minn. Stat., sec. 84.0895, subd. 8). Rules governing permits for the taking, possession, and disposition of endangered species were first promulgated in 1974 (Commissioners Order No. 1901; July 31, 1974). These were substantially expanded in 1985, and extended protection and permit requirements to threatened species as well (Commissioners Order No. 2204; May 30, 1985). The provisions of Commissioners Order No. 2204 were codified into rule in 1993 (18 S.R. 83; July 12, 1993), and are found at Minn. Rules, parts 6212.1800-2300. The permit scheme, including the application process, appropriate applicants, limits on possession of specimens or their offspring, reporting, and expiration or cancellation of permits is detailed in Minn. Rules, part 6212.1800. Permitting for the rehabilitation of living specimens, possession of previously acquired specimens or specimens acquired as a result of emergency taking, and other activities otherwise prohibited is detailed in Minn. Rules, parts 6212.1900-.2300. Note that Minn. Rules, parts 6212.1800-.2300 are not the subject of this rulemaking. History of Minnesota’s List of Endangered, Threatened, and Special Concern Species The authority to designate state endangered animals by rulemaking was first given to the DNR commissioner in Laws of Minnesota 1971, Ch. 825, but this authority was never exercised. However, this law listed several species as endangered, and provided that an “endangered” designation by the Secretary of the Interior (pursuant to federal endangered species law) would be prima facie evidence for a state designation by the commissioner. The category of threatened animals was added to the authority to designate species in Laws of Minnesota 1974, Ch. 465. The 1974 amendment reaffirmed the DNR commissioner’s authority to designate state endangered and threatened animals, and dropped the statutory list of species created in 1971, but provided that “...until the commissioner adopts such a regulation, those species designated as endangered by Section 4(c)(3) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (Public Law 93-205) at the time of enactment thereof shall be considered endangered within the meaning of this section.” The special concern category was added to the statute in 1981, as was the application of all three categories to plants (Laws of Minnesota 1981, Ch. 285). The 1981 amendment once again directed the DNR commissioner to promulgate by rule a state List, required the convening of a voluntary Technical Advisory Committee to assist in developing the List, and specified that the List be promulgated by January 1, 1984. The 1981 amendment also provided that this committee would terminate upon adoption of the resulting rule, but in no event later than January 1, 1984. As a Proposed Amendment of Minnesota Rules, Chapter 6134: Endangered and Threatened Species Statement of Need and Reasonableness: December 4, 1995 Page 2 result, the advisory committee provision is not a part of the current statute. Minnesota’s List of Endangered, Threatened, and Special Concern Species was adopted on March 5, 1984. This List is currently codified as Minn. Rules, Ch. 6134 (“Department of Natural Resources, Endangered and Threatened Species”). Promulgation of this List subsequently resulted in the legislature deleting the language incorporating the federal list into Minnesota law (Laws of Minnesota 1986, Ch. 386). The 1981 amendment also added the requirement that “The commissioner shall reevaluate
Load more

Recommended publications
  • "National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1996 National Summary."
    Intro 1996 National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands The Fish and Wildlife Service has prepared a National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1996 National Summary (1996 National List). The 1996 National List is a draft revision of the National List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1988 National Summary (Reed 1988) (1988 National List). The 1996 National List is provided to encourage additional public review and comments on the draft regional wetland indicator assignments. The 1996 National List reflects a significant amount of new information that has become available since 1988 on the wetland affinity of vascular plants. This new information has resulted from the extensive use of the 1988 National List in the field by individuals involved in wetland and other resource inventories, wetland identification and delineation, and wetland research. Interim Regional Interagency Review Panel (Regional Panel) changes in indicator status as well as additions and deletions to the 1988 National List were documented in Regional supplements. The National List was originally developed as an appendix to the Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States (Cowardin et al.1979) to aid in the consistent application of this classification system for wetlands in the field.. The 1996 National List also was developed to aid in determining the presence of hydrophytic vegetation in the Clean Water Act Section 404 wetland regulatory program and in the implementation of the swampbuster provisions of the Food Security Act. While not required by law or regulation, the Fish and Wildlife Service is making the 1996 National List available for review and comment.
    [Show full text]
  • Statement of Need and Reasonableness: August 10, 2012
    CADDISFLIES ONLY Notations Used E Endangered T Threatened SC Special Concern N None (location records maintained by DNR, in most cases) N (X) None, and probably extirpated from Minnesota (location records maintained by DNR, in most cases) -- None (location records not yet maintained by DNR) * Change in scientific name accompanies change in status CHANGE IN STATUS; STATUS SHEET PROVIDED Common Name Scientific Name Current Proposed Status Status A Species of Northern Caddisfly Anabolia ozburni -- SC * A Species of Northern Caddisfly Asynarchus rossi SC T A Species of Long Horned Caddisfly Ceraclea brevis SC N Vertrees's Ceraclean Caddisfly Ceraclea vertreesi SC N Headwaters Chilostigman Caddisfly Chilostigma itascae E T A Species of Caddisfly Goera stylata -- T A Species of Purse Casemaker Caddisfly Hydroptila novicola SC N A Species of Purse Casemaker Caddisfly Hydroptila quinola -- SC A Species of Purse Casemaker Caddisfly Hydroptila rono -- T A Species of Purse Casemaker Caddisfly Hydroptila waskesia -- E A Species of Northern Caddisfly Ironoquia punctatissima -- T A Species of Caddisfly Lepidostoma libum -- T A Species of Northern Caddisfly Limnephilus janus -- E A Species of Northern Caddisfly Limnephilus secludens -- E A Species of Purse Casemaker Caddisfly Ochrotrichia spinosa -- E A Species of Long Horned Caddisfly Oecetis ditissa -- T A Species of Purse Casemaker Caddisfly Oxyethira ecornuta SC T A Species of Netspinning Caddisfly Parapsyche apicalis -- T A Species of Tube Casemaker Caddisfly Polycentropus glacialis -- T A Species
    [Show full text]
  • Biological Evaluation for US Trunk Highway 2 Passing Lane and Turn Lane Improvements
    Draft Biological Evaluation for US Trunk Highway 2 Passing Lane and Turn Lane Improvements Prepared by: Minnesota Department of Transportation Prepared for: US Forest Service, Chippewa National Forest Minnesota Department of Natural Resources May 2014 US Highwy 2 Passing Lane and Turn Lane Improvements Biological Evaluation This Biological Evaluation was prepared pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act, National Forest Management Act, and other applicable laws and regulations. For additional information, please contact the team leader for the US Trunk Highway 2 Passing Lane and Turn Lane Improvements Project. Ms. Christine Brown Chippewa National Forest Address: 200 Ash Avenue NW Cass Lake, MN 56633 Phone: (218) 335-8600 TTY: (218) 335-8632 FAX: (218)335-8637 Prepared by: ______________________________________ _______________ Antony Randazzo, HDR Engineering, Inc. Date Reviewed by: ______________________________________ _______________ Kirk W. Larson, U.S. Forest Service Date Chippewa National Forest Reviewed by: ______________________________________ _______________ Cory Mlodik, U.S. Forest Service Date Chippewa National Forest May 2014 Signature Page Page i US Highwy 2 Passing Lane and Turn Lane Improvements Biological Evaluation Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 1-1 1.1 Purpose of this Report ..............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Plant Species of Special Concern and Vascular Plant Flora of the National
    Plant Species of Special Concern and Vascular Plant Flora of the National Elk Refuge Prepared for the US Fish and Wildlife Service National Elk Refuge By Walter Fertig Wyoming Natural Diversity Database The Nature Conservancy 1604 Grand Avenue Laramie, WY 82070 February 28, 1998 Acknowledgements I would like to thank the following individuals for their assistance with this project: Jim Ozenberger, ecologist with the Jackson Ranger District of Bridger-Teton National Forest, for guiding me in his canoe on Flat Creek and for providing aerial photographs and lodging; Jennifer Whipple, Yellowstone National Park botanist, for field assistance and help with field identification of rare Carex species; Dr. David Cooper of Colorado State University, for sharing field information from his 1994 studies; Dr. Ron Hartman and Ernie Nelson of the Rocky Mountain Herbarium, for providing access to unmounted collections by Michele Potkin and others from the National Elk Refuge; Dr. Anton Reznicek of the University of Michigan, for confirming the identification of several problematic Carex specimens; Dr. Robert Dorn for confirming the identification of several vegetative Salix specimens; and lastly Bruce Smith and the staff of the National Elk Refuge for providing funding and logistical support and for allowing me free rein to roam the refuge for plants. 2 Table of Contents Page Introduction . 6 Study Area . 6 Methods . 8 Results . 10 Vascular Plant Flora of the National Elk Refuge . 10 Plant Species of Special Concern . 10 Species Summaries . 23 Aster borealis . 24 Astragalus terminalis . 26 Carex buxbaumii . 28 Carex parryana var. parryana . 30 Carex sartwellii . 32 Carex scirpoidea var. scirpiformis .
    [Show full text]
  • Conservation and Management of Eastern Big-Eared Bats a Symposium
    Conservation and Management of Eastern Big-eared Bats A Symposium y Edited b Susan C. Loeb, Michael J. Lacki, and Darren A. Miller U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service Southern Research Station General Technical Report SRS-145 DISCLAIMER The use of trade or firm names in this publication is for reader information and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Department of Agriculture of any product or service. Papers published in these proceedings were submitted by authors in electronic media. Some editing was done to ensure a consistent format. Authors are responsible for content and accuracy of their individual papers and the quality of illustrative materials. Cover photos: Large photo: Craig W. Stihler; small left photo: Joseph S. Johnson; small middle photo: Craig W. Stihler; small right photo: Matthew J. Clement. December 2011 Southern Research Station 200 W.T. Weaver Blvd. Asheville, NC 28804 Conservation and Management of Eastern Big-eared Bats: A Symposium Athens, Georgia March 9–10, 2010 Edited by: Susan C. Loeb U.S Department of Agriculture Forest Service Southern Research Station Michael J. Lacki University of Kentucky Darren A. Miller Weyerhaeuser NR Company Sponsored by: Forest Service Bat Conservation International National Council for Air and Stream Improvement (NCASI) Warnell School of Forestry and Natural Resources Offield Family Foundation ContEntS Preface . v Conservation and Management of Eastern Big-Eared Bats: An Introduction . 1 Susan C. Loeb, Michael J. Lacki, and Darren A. Miller Distribution and Status of Eastern Big-eared Bats (Corynorhinus Spp .) . 13 Mylea L. Bayless, Mary Kay Clark, Richard C. Stark, Barbara S.
    [Show full text]
  • The Jepson Manual: Vascular Plants of California, Second Edition Supplement II December 2014
    The Jepson Manual: Vascular Plants of California, Second Edition Supplement II December 2014 In the pages that follow are treatments that have been revised since the publication of the Jepson eFlora, Revision 1 (July 2013). The information in these revisions is intended to supersede that in the second edition of The Jepson Manual (2012). The revised treatments, as well as errata and other small changes not noted here, are included in the Jepson eFlora (http://ucjeps.berkeley.edu/IJM.html). For a list of errata and small changes in treatments that are not included here, please see: http://ucjeps.berkeley.edu/JM12_errata.html Citation for the entire Jepson eFlora: Jepson Flora Project (eds.) [year] Jepson eFlora, http://ucjeps.berkeley.edu/IJM.html [accessed on month, day, year] Citation for an individual treatment in this supplement: [Author of taxon treatment] 2014. [Taxon name], Revision 2, in Jepson Flora Project (eds.) Jepson eFlora, [URL for treatment]. Accessed on [month, day, year]. Copyright © 2014 Regents of the University of California Supplement II, Page 1 Summary of changes made in Revision 2 of the Jepson eFlora, December 2014 PTERIDACEAE *Pteridaceae key to genera: All of the CA members of Cheilanthes transferred to Myriopteris *Cheilanthes: Cheilanthes clevelandii D. C. Eaton changed to Myriopteris clevelandii (D. C. Eaton) Grusz & Windham, as native Cheilanthes cooperae D. C. Eaton changed to Myriopteris cooperae (D. C. Eaton) Grusz & Windham, as native Cheilanthes covillei Maxon changed to Myriopteris covillei (Maxon) Á. Löve & D. Löve, as native Cheilanthes feei T. Moore changed to Myriopteris gracilis Fée, as native Cheilanthes gracillima D.
    [Show full text]
  • 2009 Land Management Plan
    2009 LAND MANAGEMENT PLAN (Updated Annual Harvest Plan -2014) Itasca County Land Department 1177 LaPrairie Avenue Grand Rapids, MN 55744-3322 218-327-2855 ● Fax: 218-327-4160 LAND MANAGEMENT PLAN Itasca County Land Department Acknowledgements This Land Management Plan was produced by Itasca County Land Department employees Garrett Ous, Dave Marshall, Michael Gibbons, Adam Olson, Bob Scheierl, Roger Clark, Kory Cease, Steve Aysta, Tim Stocker, Perry Leone, Wayne Perreault, Blair Carlson, Loren Eide, Bob Rother, Andrew Brown, Del Inkman, Darlene Brown and Meg Muller. Thank you to all the citizens for their sincere input and review during the public involvement process. And thank you to Itasca County Commissioners Lori Dowling, Karen Burthwick, Rusty Eichorn, Catherine McLynn and Mark Mandich for their vision and final approval of this document. Foreword This land management plan is designed for providing vision and direction to guide strategic and operational programs of the Land Department. That vision and direction reflects a long standing connection with local economic, educational and social programs. The Land Department is committed to ensuring that economic benefits and environmental integrity are available to both present and future generations. That will be accomplished through actively managing county land and forests for a balance of benefits to the citizens and for providing them with a sustained supply of quality products and services. The Department will apply quality forestland stewardship practices, employ modern technology and information, and partner with other forest organizations to provide citizens with those quality products and services. ________________________________ Garrett Ous September, 2009 Itasca County Land Commissioner 1177 LaPrairie Avenue Grand Rapids, MN 55744-3322 218-327-2855 ● Fax: 218-327-4160 ICLD - LMP Section i., page 1 of 3 Itasca County Land Department Land Management Plan Table of Contents i.
    [Show full text]
  • Jump Takeoff in a Small Jumping Spider
    Journal of Comparative Physiology A https://doi.org/10.1007/s00359-021-01473-7 ORIGINAL PAPER Jump takeof in a small jumping spider Erin E. Brandt1,2 · Yoshan Sasiharan2 · Damian O. Elias1 · Natasha Mhatre2 Received: 27 October 2020 / Revised: 4 February 2021 / Accepted: 23 February 2021 © The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2021 Abstract Jumping in animals presents an interesting locomotory strategy as it requires the generation of large forces and accurate timing. Jumping in arachnids is further complicated by their semi-hydraulic locomotion system. Among arachnids, jumping spiders (Family Salticidae) are agile and dexterous jumpers. However, less is known about jumping in small salticid species. Here we used Habronattus conjunctus, a small jumping spider (body length ~ 4.5 mm) to examine its jumping performance and compare it to that of other jumping spiders and insects. We also explored how legs are used during the takeof phase of jumps. Jumps were staged between two raised platforms. We analyzed jumping videos with DeepLabCut to track 21 points on the cephalothorax, abdomen, and legs. By analyzing leg liftof and extension patterns, we found evidence that H. conjunc- tus primarily uses the third legs to power jumps. We also found that H. conjunctus jumps achieve lower takeof speeds and accelerations than most other jumping arthropods, including other jumping spiders. Habronattus conjunctus takeof time was similar to other jumping arthropods of the same body mass. We discuss the mechanical benefts and drawbacks of a semi- hydraulic system of locomotion and consider how small spiders may extract dexterous jumps from this locomotor system.
    [Show full text]
  • Report-VIC-Croajingolong National Park-Appendix A
    Croajingolong National Park, Victoria, 2016 Appendix A: Fauna species lists Family Species Common name Mammals Acrobatidae Acrobates pygmaeus Feathertail Glider Balaenopteriae Megaptera novaeangliae # ~ Humpback Whale Burramyidae Cercartetus nanus ~ Eastern Pygmy Possum Canidae Vulpes vulpes ^ Fox Cervidae Cervus unicolor ^ Sambar Deer Dasyuridae Antechinus agilis Agile Antechinus Dasyuridae Antechinus mimetes Dusky Antechinus Dasyuridae Sminthopsis leucopus White-footed Dunnart Felidae Felis catus ^ Cat Leporidae Oryctolagus cuniculus ^ Rabbit Macropodidae Macropus giganteus Eastern Grey Kangaroo Macropodidae Macropus rufogriseus Red Necked Wallaby Macropodidae Wallabia bicolor Swamp Wallaby Miniopteridae Miniopterus schreibersii oceanensis ~ Eastern Bent-wing Bat Muridae Hydromys chrysogaster Water Rat Muridae Mus musculus ^ House Mouse Muridae Rattus fuscipes Bush Rat Muridae Rattus lutreolus Swamp Rat Otariidae Arctocephalus pusillus doriferus ~ Australian Fur-seal Otariidae Arctocephalus forsteri ~ New Zealand Fur Seal Peramelidae Isoodon obesulus Southern Brown Bandicoot Peramelidae Perameles nasuta Long-nosed Bandicoot Petauridae Petaurus australis Yellow Bellied Glider Petauridae Petaurus breviceps Sugar Glider Phalangeridae Trichosurus cunninghami Mountain Brushtail Possum Phalangeridae Trichosurus vulpecula Common Brushtail Possum Phascolarctidae Phascolarctos cinereus Koala Potoroidae Potorous sp. # ~ Long-nosed or Long-footed Potoroo Pseudocheiridae Petauroides volans Greater Glider Pseudocheiridae Pseudocheirus peregrinus
    [Show full text]
  • Lepidoptera: Tortricidae: Tortricinae) and Evolutionary Correlates of Novel Secondary Sexual Structures
    Zootaxa 3729 (1): 001–062 ISSN 1175-5326 (print edition) www.mapress.com/zootaxa/ Monograph ZOOTAXA Copyright © 2013 Magnolia Press ISSN 1175-5334 (online edition) http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.3729.1.1 http://zoobank.org/urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:CA0C1355-FF3E-4C67-8F48-544B2166AF2A ZOOTAXA 3729 Phylogeny of the tribe Archipini (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae: Tortricinae) and evolutionary correlates of novel secondary sexual structures JASON J. DOMBROSKIE1,2,3 & FELIX A. H. SPERLING2 1Cornell University, Comstock Hall, Department of Entomology, Ithaca, NY, USA, 14853-2601. E-mail: [email protected] 2Department of Biological Sciences, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada, T6G 2E9 3Corresponding author Magnolia Press Auckland, New Zealand Accepted by J. Brown: 2 Sept. 2013; published: 25 Oct. 2013 Licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0 JASON J. DOMBROSKIE & FELIX A. H. SPERLING Phylogeny of the tribe Archipini (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae: Tortricinae) and evolutionary correlates of novel secondary sexual structures (Zootaxa 3729) 62 pp.; 30 cm. 25 Oct. 2013 ISBN 978-1-77557-288-6 (paperback) ISBN 978-1-77557-289-3 (Online edition) FIRST PUBLISHED IN 2013 BY Magnolia Press P.O. Box 41-383 Auckland 1346 New Zealand e-mail: [email protected] http://www.mapress.com/zootaxa/ © 2013 Magnolia Press 2 · Zootaxa 3729 (1) © 2013 Magnolia Press DOMBROSKIE & SPERLING Table of contents Abstract . 3 Material and methods . 6 Results . 18 Discussion . 23 Conclusions . 33 Acknowledgements . 33 Literature cited . 34 APPENDIX 1. 38 APPENDIX 2. 44 Additional References for Appendices 1 & 2 . 49 APPENDIX 3. 51 APPENDIX 4. 52 APPENDIX 5.
    [Show full text]
  • ENSR Letter Format 1 [Temp]
    TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Introduction.................................................................................................................................................1-1 1.1. Study Overview.............................................................................................................................1-1 1.2. Acknowledgements .......................................................................................................................1-2 2.0 Study Area...................................................................................................................................................2-1 3.0 Methods.......................................................................................................................................................3-1 3.1. Literature Review and Personal Communications ........................................................................3-1 3.2. Database Queries...........................................................................................................................3-1 3.3. Field Surveys.................................................................................................................................3-3 3.3.1. General Survey Methodology..........................................................................................3-3 3.3.2. Transect Surveys..............................................................................................................3-3 3.3.3. Northern Goshawk, Owl, and Gray Wolf Calling Surveys..............................................3-3
    [Show full text]
  • Biodiversity of Minnesota Caddisflies (Insecta: Trichoptera)
    Conservation Biology Research Grants Program Division of Ecological Services Minnesota Department of Natural Resources BIODIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA CADDISFLIES (INSECTA: TRICHOPTERA) A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA BY DAVID CHARLES HOUGHTON IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Ralph W. Holzenthal, Advisor August 2002 1 © David Charles Houghton 2002 2 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS As is often the case, the research that appears here under my name only could not have possibly been accomplished without the assistance of numerous individuals. First and foremost, I sincerely appreciate the assistance of my graduate advisor, Dr. Ralph. W. Holzenthal. His enthusiasm, guidance, and support of this project made it a reality. I also extend my gratitude to my graduate committee, Drs. Leonard C. Ferrington, Jr., Roger D. Moon, and Bruce Vondracek, for their helpful ideas and advice. I appreciate the efforts of all who have collected Minnesota caddisflies and accessioned them into the University of Minnesota Insect Museum, particularly Roger J. Blahnik, Donald G. Denning, David A. Etnier, Ralph W. Holzenthal, Jolanda Huisman, David B. MacLean, Margot P. Monson, and Phil A. Nasby. I also thank David A. Etnier (University of Tennessee), Colin Favret (Illinois Natural History Survey), and Oliver S. Flint, Jr. (National Museum of Natural History) for making caddisfly collections available for my examination. The laboratory assistance of the following individuals-my undergraduate "army"-was critical to the processing of the approximately one half million caddisfly specimens examined during this study and I extend my thanks: Geoffery D. Archibald, Anne M.
    [Show full text]