DOCSLIB.ORG

Big Chetac and Birch Lakes, Sawyer/Washburn County

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Big Chetac and Birch Lakes, Sawyer/Washburn County Lake Education and Planning Services, LLC 302 21 ¼ Street Chetek, Wisconsin 54728 BIG CHETAC AND BIRCH LAKES , SAWYER/WASHBURN COUNTY 2020-24 Comprehensive Management Plan WDNR WBIC: 2113300 & 2113000 Prepared by: Dave Blumer, Lake Educator December, 2019 Big Chetac and Birch Lakes Association Birchwood, WI 54817 1 | P a g e 2 | P a g e Distribution List No. of Copies Sent to 2 Mark Robinson, President Big Chetac and Birch Lakes Association Box 33 Birchwood, WI 54817 1 Alex Smith Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources 810 W. Maple Street Spooner, WI 54801 3 | P a g e 4 | P a g e TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 13 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION AND STAKEHOLDER INPUT 15 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT 15 GOVERNMENT AND RESORT OWNER INTERVIEWS 15 STAKEHOLDERS COMMITTEE 15 LAKE MANAGEMENT PLANNING GRANT PROJECT 16 STAKEHOLDER COMMITTEE MEETINGS 16 PUBLIC MEETINGS 16 BIG CHETAC AND BIRCH LAKES ASSOCIATION 17 PAST MANAGEMENT PLANNING AND IMPLEMENTATION IN BIG CHETAC, BIRCH, AND LITTLE BIRCH LAKES 19 PAST MANAGEMENT PLANNING AND IMPLEMENTATION 19 CLP MANAGEMENT IN THE NORTH BAY OF BIG CHETAC LAKE 19 BIG CHETAC AND BIRCH LAKES WATERSHED CHARACTERISTICS 21 LAND USE 21 SOILS 23 WETLANDS 24 FORESTRY 25 MINING 26 NATURAL HERITAGE INVENTORY 27 LAKE CHARACTERISTICS 29 PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS – BIG CHETAC LAKE 29 PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS – BIRCH AND LITTLE BIRCH LAKES 29 WATER QUALITY – BIG CHETAC LAKE 31 2008 Paleo-ecological Sediment Core Study 31 Modern Water Quality 31 WATER QUALITY – BIRCH LAKE 33 TEMPERATURE AND DISSOLVED OXYGEN 36 Temperature 36 Dissolved Oxygen 37 Causes of Increased Temperature in Lakes 38 WATER BUDGET AND NUTRIENT LOADING – BIG CHETAC AND BIRCH LAKES 39 NUTRIENT LOADING IN BIG CHETAC LAKE 39 LAKE SYSTEM FLUSHING AND WATER QUALITY 41 CONTROLLING OR REDUCING EXTERNAL NUTRIENT INPUTS 42 Best Management Practices (BMP’s) in the Watershed That Reduce Phosphorous Loading 42 BMP’s in the Developed Near Shore Area That Reduce Phosphorous Loading 43 CONTRIBUTIONS OF TOTAL PHOSPHORUS FROM CURLY-LEAF PONDWEED IN BIG CHETAC AND BIRCH LAKES 43 INTERNAL LOADING IN BIG CHETAC AND BIRCH LAKES 44 USING ALUM TO REDUCE INTERNAL LOADING 45 Big Chetac Lake Alum Study 46 Alum in Birch Lake 47 CONSTITUENT REACTION TO APPLICATION OF ALUM 48 AQUATIC PLANTS IN BIG CHETAC, BIRCH, AND LITTLE BIRCH LAKES 49 BIG CHETAC LAKE 49 5 | P a g e Wild Rice 53 BIRCH LAKE 55 Birch and Little Birch Lakes Plant Community 59 WATER CLARITY, ALGAE, AND AQUATIC PLANT GROWTH IN BIG CHETAC AND BIRCH LAKES 63 SHORELANDS 66 PROTECTING WATER QUALITY 66 PROTECTING AGAINST INVASION OF INVASIVE SPECIES 66 THREATS TO SHORELANDS 67 SHORELAND PRESERVATION AND RESTORATION 67 2017 SHORELAND HABITAT ASSESSMENT 68 Lake-wide Summary OF Results 69 Priority Rankings by Parcel 70 Coarse Woody Habitat in Big Chetac, Birch, and Little Birch Lakes 73 FISHERIES (EXCERPTS FROM THE 2017 SURVEY REPORT BY MAX WOLTER, WDNR) 76 BIG CHETAC LAKE 76 BIRCH LAKE 77 FISHERIES CONTROVERSY 77 2017 LAKE USE AND FISHING SUCCESS SURVEY 78 2017-18 WDNR CREEL SURVEY 81 WAVES AND WATERCRAFT 84 WAKE BOATS 84 MOTORIZED BOATING IN GENERAL 84 IMPACTS ON BIG CHETAC, BIRCH, AND LITTLE BIRCH LAKES 85 AQUATIC INVASIVE SPECIES (AIS) 86 NON-NATIVE, AQUATIC INVASIVE PLANT SPECIES 86 Curly-leaf Pondweed 86 Eurasian WaterMilfoil 86 Purple Loosestrife 87 Reed Canary Grass 89 NON-NATIVE AQUATIC INVASIVE ANIMAL SPECIES 90 Chinese Mystery Snails 90 Rusty crayfish 91 Zebra Mussels 92 AIS PREVENTION STRATEGY 93 WISCONSIN’S AQUATIC PLANT MANAGEMENT STRATEGY 94 AQUATIC PLANT MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVES 95 NO MANAGEMENT 95 HAND-PULLING/MANUAL REMOVAL 96 DIVER ASSISTED SUCTION HARVESTING 97 MECHANICAL REMOVAL 97 Mechanical Harvesting 97 Small-Scale Cutting with removal 99 BOTTOM BARRIERS AND SHADING 99 DREDGING 99 DRAWDOWN 100 BIOLOGICAL CONTROL 100 Galerucella beetles 100 6 | P a g e EWM Weevils 101 Other Biological Controls 102 CHEMICAL CONTROL 102 How Chemical Control Works 103 Efficacy of Aquatic Herbicides 104 Micro and Small-scale Herbicide Application 104 Large-scale Herbicide Application 105 Pre and Post Treatment Aquatic Plant Surveying 105 Chemical Concentration Testing 105 HERBICIDE USE IN THE BIG CHETAC, BIRCH, AND LITTLE BIRCH LAKES 106 MANAGEMENT DISCUSSION 107 BIRCH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISCUSSION 107 BIG CHETAC LAKE MANAGEMENT DISCUSSION 108 WHOLE SYSTEM MANAGEMENT DISCUSSION 111 Nearshore and Watershed Best Management Practices 111 Aquatic Invasive Species 111 Lake Use 112 Fisheries Management 112 Monitoring, Modification, Survey, and Tracking 112 Upper Red Cedar River Watershed Water and Nutrient Budgeting 113 GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND ACTIONS 115 WDNR AIS GRANT PROGRAMS 117 LAKE MANAGEMENT PLANNING GRANTS 117 SMALL SCALE LAKE MANAGEMENT PROJECTS 117 LARGE SCALE LAKE MANAGEMENT PROJECTS 117 LAKE PROTECTION GRANTS 117 HEALTHY LAKES PROJECTS 117 AQUATIC INVASIVE SPECIES GRANTS 118 GRANT FUNDS TO ASSIST IMPLEMENTATION OF THIS COMP PLAN 118 WORKS CITED 119 7 | P a g e 8 | P a g e Figures Figure 1: Original 2013 90.8 acre CLP treatment area; 2008 CLP distribution; and 2014 CLP distribution.......20 Figure 2: Red Cedar Lake watershed - LC11, (WDNR) ....................................................................................................21 Figure 3: Big Chetac, Birch, and Little Birch lakes watershed .......................................................................................22 Figure 4: Soil drainage classes in the Big Chetac, Birch, and Little Birch lakes watershed ..................................24 Figure 5: Wetlands in the Big Chetac, Birch, and Little Birch lakes watershed ........................................................25 Figure 6: Sawyer and Washburn County owned land adjacent to Big Chetac and Birch lakes ............................26 Figure 7: Big Chetac Lake depth and bottom substrate ...................................................................................................29 Figure 8: Birch and Little Birch Lake map............................................................................................................................30 Figure 9: Bottom substrate in Birch and Little Birch lakes ..............................................................................................30 Figure 10: Average summer Secchi depth in the Central and South basins, 2007-2017 (two or more readings in July and August) .......................................................................................................................................................................32 Figure 11: Chlorophyll-a and total phosphorus annual averages in the Central basin using WisCALM parameters, 2007-2017 ...................................................................................................................................................................32 Figure 12: Average monthly Secchi disk reading of water clarity from the Deep Hole in Birch Lake ...............33 Figure 13: Temperature (red line) and DO (green line) profiles from Birch Lake (2017 & 2018) .........................35 Figure 14: Summer thermal stratification ...............................................................................................................................37 Figure 15: Total Phosphorus Loading into Big Chetac Lake ..........................................................................................40 Figure 16: Location of the proposed aluminum sulfate treatment area in the North basin of Big Chetac Lake .............................................................................................................................................................................................................47 Figure 17: Native species richness (diversity) in Big Chetac Lake, 2008, 2014, & 2017 ...........................................50 Figure 18: Locations in Big Chetac Lake ...............................................................................................................................51 Figure 19: Total rake fullness (density) in Big Chetac Lake, 2008, 2014, and 2017 ....................................................51 Figure 20: Visualization of rake fullness values from the whole-lake, point-intercept aquatic plant survey ....52 Figure 21: Distribution and density of small pondweed in Big Chetac Lake .............................................................53 Figure 22: Panorama of northern wild rice in Malviney Creek inlet facing northwest into the Bullpen – 7/28/17 (Berg M. S., 2017a) ........................................................................................................................................................54 Figure 23: Rice remnants in bays southwest of Malviney Creek inlet – 7/28/17 (Berg M. S., 2017a) .................54 Figure 24: 2008, 2014, and 2017 northern wild rice density and distribution ...............................................................54 Figure 25: Rake Fullness Values (density) of points with CLP .......................................................................................55 Figure 26: CLP density in Birch and Little Birch lakes .....................................................................................................56 Figure 27: 2017 Summer plant density in Birch and Little Birch lakes. ........................................................................57 Figure 28: Localize native species richness in Birch and Little Birch lakes ...............................................................58 Figure 29: Distribution and density of coontail and fern-leaf pondweed in Birch
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina 2016
    Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina 2016 Revised February 24, 2017 Compiled by Laura Gadd Robinson, Botanist John T. Finnegan, Information Systems Manager North Carolina Natural Heritage Program N.C. Department of Natural and Cultural Resources Raleigh, NC 27699-1651 www.ncnhp.org C ur Alleghany rit Ashe Northampton Gates C uc Surry am k Stokes P d Rockingham Caswell Person Vance Warren a e P s n Hertford e qu Chowan r Granville q ot ui a Mountains Watauga Halifax m nk an Wilkes Yadkin s Mitchell Avery Forsyth Orange Guilford Franklin Bertie Alamance Durham Nash Yancey Alexander Madison Caldwell Davie Edgecombe Washington Tyrrell Iredell Martin Dare Burke Davidson Wake McDowell Randolph Chatham Wilson Buncombe Catawba Rowan Beaufort Haywood Pitt Swain Hyde Lee Lincoln Greene Rutherford Johnston Graham Henderson Jackson Cabarrus Montgomery Harnett Cleveland Wayne Polk Gaston Stanly Cherokee Macon Transylvania Lenoir Mecklenburg Moore Clay Pamlico Hoke Union d Cumberland Jones Anson on Sampson hm Duplin ic Craven Piedmont R nd tla Onslow Carteret co S Robeson Bladen Pender Sandhills Columbus New Hanover Tidewater Coastal Plain Brunswick THE COUNTIES AND PHYSIOGRAPHIC PROVINCES OF NORTH CAROLINA Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina 2016 Compiled by Laura Gadd Robinson, Botanist John T. Finnegan, Information Systems Manager North Carolina Natural Heritage Program N.C. Department of Natural and Cultural Resources Raleigh, NC 27699-1651 www.ncnhp.org This list is dynamic and is revised frequently as new data become available. New species are added to the list, and others are dropped from the list as appropriate.
    [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]
  • State of New York City's Plants 2018
    STATE OF NEW YORK CITY’S PLANTS 2018 Daniel Atha & Brian Boom © 2018 The New York Botanical Garden All rights reserved ISBN 978-0-89327-955-4 Center for Conservation Strategy The New York Botanical Garden 2900 Southern Boulevard Bronx, NY 10458 All photos NYBG staff Citation: Atha, D. and B. Boom. 2018. State of New York City’s Plants 2018. Center for Conservation Strategy. The New York Botanical Garden, Bronx, NY. 132 pp. STATE OF NEW YORK CITY’S PLANTS 2018 4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 6 INTRODUCTION 10 DOCUMENTING THE CITY’S PLANTS 10 The Flora of New York City 11 Rare Species 14 Focus on Specific Area 16 Botanical Spectacle: Summer Snow 18 CITIZEN SCIENCE 20 THREATS TO THE CITY’S PLANTS 24 NEW YORK STATE PROHIBITED AND REGULATED INVASIVE SPECIES FOUND IN NEW YORK CITY 26 LOOKING AHEAD 27 CONTRIBUTORS AND ACKNOWLEGMENTS 30 LITERATURE CITED 31 APPENDIX Checklist of the Spontaneous Vascular Plants of New York City 32 Ferns and Fern Allies 35 Gymnosperms 36 Nymphaeales and Magnoliids 37 Monocots 67 Dicots 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report, State of New York City’s Plants 2018, is the first rankings of rare, threatened, endangered, and extinct species of what is envisioned by the Center for Conservation Strategy known from New York City, and based on this compilation of The New York Botanical Garden as annual updates thirteen percent of the City’s flora is imperiled or extinct in New summarizing the status of the spontaneous plant species of the York City. five boroughs of New York City. This year’s report deals with the City’s vascular plants (ferns and fern allies, gymnosperms, We have begun the process of assessing conservation status and flowering plants), but in the future it is planned to phase in at the local level for all species.
    [Show full text]
  • HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLAN Green Bay and Gravel Island
    HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLAN Green Bay and Gravel Island National Wildlife Refuges October 2017 Habitat Management Plans provide long-term guidance for management decisions; set forth goals, objectives, and strategies needed to accomplish refuge purposes; and, identify the Fish and Wildlife Service’s best estimate of future needs. These plans detail program planning levels that are sometimes substantially above current budget allocations and as such, are primarily for Service strategic planning and program prioritization purposes. The plans do not constitute a commitment for staffing increases, operational and maintenance increases, or funding for future land acquisition. The National Wildlife Refuge System, managed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, is the world's premier system of public lands and waters set aside to conserve America's fish, wildlife, and plants. Since the designation of the first wildlife refuge in 1903, the System has grown to encompass more than 150 million acres, 556 national wildlife refuges and other units of the Refuge System, plus 38 wetland management districts. This page intentionally left blank. Habitat Management Plan for Green Bay and Gravel Island National Wildlife Refuges EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Habitat Management Plan (HMP) provides vision and specific guidance on enhancing and managing habitat for the resources of concern (ROC) at the refuge. The contributions of the refuge to ecosystem- and landscape-scale wildlife and biodiversity conservation, specifically migratory waterfowl, are incorporated into this HMP. The HMP is intended to provide habitat management direction for the next 15 years. The HMP is also needed to ensure that the refuge continues to conserve habitat for migratory birds in the context of climate change, which affects all units of the National Wildlife Refuge System.
    [Show full text]
  • Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina 2012
    Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina 2012 Edited by Laura E. Gadd, Botanist John T. Finnegan, Information Systems Manager North Carolina Natural Heritage Program Office of Conservation, Planning, and Community Affairs N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources 1601 MSC, Raleigh, NC 27699-1601 Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina 2012 Edited by Laura E. Gadd, Botanist John T. Finnegan, Information Systems Manager North Carolina Natural Heritage Program Office of Conservation, Planning, and Community Affairs N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources 1601 MSC, Raleigh, NC 27699-1601 www.ncnhp.org NATURAL HERITAGE PROGRAM LIST OF THE RARE PLANTS OF NORTH CAROLINA 2012 Edition Edited by Laura E. Gadd, Botanist and John Finnegan, Information Systems Manager North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Office of Conservation, Planning, and Community Affairs Department of Environment and Natural Resources, 1601 MSC, Raleigh, NC 27699-1601 www.ncnhp.org Table of Contents LIST FORMAT ......................................................................................................................................................................... 3 NORTH CAROLINA RARE PLANT LIST ......................................................................................................................... 10 NORTH CAROLINA PLANT WATCH LIST ..................................................................................................................... 71 Watch Category
    [Show full text]
  • Ohio EPA Macroinvertebrate Taxonomic Level December 2019 1 Table 1. Current Taxonomic Keys and the Level of Taxonomy Routinely U
    Ohio EPA Macroinvertebrate Taxonomic Level December 2019 Table 1. Current taxonomic keys and the level of taxonomy routinely used by the Ohio EPA in streams and rivers for various macroinvertebrate taxonomic classifications. Genera that are reasonably considered to be monotypic in Ohio are also listed. Taxon Subtaxon Taxonomic Level Taxonomic Key(ies) Species Pennak 1989, Thorp & Rogers 2016 Porifera If no gemmules are present identify to family (Spongillidae). Genus Thorp & Rogers 2016 Cnidaria monotypic genera: Cordylophora caspia and Craspedacusta sowerbii Platyhelminthes Class (Turbellaria) Thorp & Rogers 2016 Nemertea Phylum (Nemertea) Thorp & Rogers 2016 Phylum (Nematomorpha) Thorp & Rogers 2016 Nematomorpha Paragordius varius monotypic genus Thorp & Rogers 2016 Genus Thorp & Rogers 2016 Ectoprocta monotypic genera: Cristatella mucedo, Hyalinella punctata, Lophopodella carteri, Paludicella articulata, Pectinatella magnifica, Pottsiella erecta Entoprocta Urnatella gracilis monotypic genus Thorp & Rogers 2016 Polychaeta Class (Polychaeta) Thorp & Rogers 2016 Annelida Oligochaeta Subclass (Oligochaeta) Thorp & Rogers 2016 Hirudinida Species Klemm 1982, Klemm et al. 2015 Anostraca Species Thorp & Rogers 2016 Species (Lynceus Laevicaudata Thorp & Rogers 2016 brachyurus) Spinicaudata Genus Thorp & Rogers 2016 Williams 1972, Thorp & Rogers Isopoda Genus 2016 Holsinger 1972, Thorp & Rogers Amphipoda Genus 2016 Gammaridae: Gammarus Species Holsinger 1972 Crustacea monotypic genera: Apocorophium lacustre, Echinogammarus ischnus, Synurella dentata Species (Taphromysis Mysida Thorp & Rogers 2016 louisianae) Crocker & Barr 1968; Jezerinac 1993, 1995; Jezerinac & Thoma 1984; Taylor 2000; Thoma et al. Cambaridae Species 2005; Thoma & Stocker 2009; Crandall & De Grave 2017; Glon et al. 2018 Species (Palaemon Pennak 1989, Palaemonidae kadiakensis) Thorp & Rogers 2016 1 Ohio EPA Macroinvertebrate Taxonomic Level December 2019 Taxon Subtaxon Taxonomic Level Taxonomic Key(ies) Informal grouping of the Arachnida Hydrachnidia Smith 2001 water mites Genus Morse et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Dytiscidae and Noteridae of Wisconsin (Coleoptera). VI
    The Great Lakes Entomologist Volume 28 Number 1 - Spring 1995 Number 1 - Spring 1995 Article 1 April 1995 Dytiscidae and Noteridae of Wisconsin (Coleoptera). VI. Distribution, Habitat, Life Cycle, and Identification of Species of Hydroporus Clairville Sensu Lato (Hydroporinae) William L. Hilsenhoff University of Wisconsin Follow this and additional works at: https://scholar.valpo.edu/tgle Part of the Entomology Commons Recommended Citation Hilsenhoff, William L. 1995. "Dytiscidae and Noteridae of Wisconsin (Coleoptera). VI. Distribution, Habitat, Life Cycle, and Identification of Species of Hydroporus Clairville Sensu Lato (Hydroporinae)," The Great Lakes Entomologist, vol 28 (1) Available at: https://scholar.valpo.edu/tgle/vol28/iss1/1 This Peer-Review Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Department of Biology at ValpoScholar. It has been accepted for inclusion in The Great Lakes Entomologist by an authorized administrator of ValpoScholar. For more information, please contact a ValpoScholar staff member at [email protected]. Hilsenhoff: Dytiscidae and Noteridae of Wisconsin (Coleoptera). VI. Distribut 1995 THE GREAT LAKES ENTOMOlOGIST DYTISCIDAE AND NOTERIDAE OF WISCONSII\J (COLEOPTERA). VI. DISTRIBUTION, HABITAT, LIFE CYCLE, AND IDENTIFICATION OF SPECIES OF HYDROPORUS CLAIRVILLE SENSU LATO! (HYDROPORINAE) William L. Hilsenhoff2 ABSTRACT Thirty-four species ofHydroporus s.l. were collected in Wisconsin over the past 32 years, including 20 of Hydroporus s.s., 7 of Neoporus, 4 of Hydroporus oblitus-group, 2 of Heterosternuta, and 1 of Sanfilippodytes. Species keys and notes on identification are provided for adults of species that occur or may occur in Wisconsin. Information on distribution and abundance in Wisconsin, habitat, and life cycle is provided for each species based on a study of 27,310 adults.
    [Show full text]
  • DE Wildlife Action Plan
    DelawareDelaware WildlifeWildlife ActionAction PlanPlan Keeping Today’s Wildlife from Becoming Tomorrow’s Memory Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control Division of Fish and Wildlife 89 King Highway Dover, Delaware 19901 [email protected] Delaware Wildlife Action Plan 2007 - 2017 Submitted to: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 300 Westgate Center Drive Hadley, MA 01035-9589 September, 2006 Submitted by: Olin Allen, Biologist Brianna Barkus, Outreach Coordinator Karen Bennett, Program Manager Cover Photos by: Chris Bennett, Chuck Fullmer, Mike Trumabauer, DE Div. of Fish & Wildlife Delaware Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program Delaware Division of Fish and Wildlife Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control 89 Kings Highway Dover DE 19901 Delaware Wildlife Action Plan Acknowledgements This project was funded, in part, through grants from the Delaware Division of Fish & Wildlife with funding from the Division of Federal Assistance, United States Fish & Wildlife Service under the State Wildlife Grants Program; and the Delaware Coastal Programs with funding from the Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration under award number NA17OZ2329. We gratefully acknowledge the participation of the following individuals: Jen Adkins Sally Kepfer NV Raman Chris Bennett Gary Kreamer Ken Reynolds Melinda Carl Annie Larson Ellen Roca John Clark Wayne Lehman Bob Rufe Rick Cole Jeff Lerner Tom Saladyga Robert Coxe Rob Line Craig Shirey Janet
    [Show full text]
  • Delaware's Wildlife Species of Greatest Conservation Need
    CHAPTER 1 DELAWARE’S WILDLIFE SPECIES OF GREATEST CONSERVATION NEED CHAPTER 1: Delaware’s Wildlife Species of Greatest Conservation Need Contents Introduction ................................................................................................................................................... 7 Regional Context ........................................................................................................................................... 7 Delaware’s Animal Biodiversity .................................................................................................................... 10 State of Knowledge of Delaware’s Species ................................................................................................... 10 Delaware’s Wildlife and SGCN - presented by Taxonomic Group .................................................................. 11 Delaware’s 2015 SGCN Status Rank Tier Definitions................................................................................. 12 TIER 1 .................................................................................................................................................... 13 TIER 2 .................................................................................................................................................... 13 TIER 3 .................................................................................................................................................... 13 Mammals ....................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Species Diversity Report George Washington National Forest Draft EIS April 2011
    Appendix F - Species Diversity Report George Washington National Forest Draft EIS April 2011 U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service Southern Region Species Diversity Report George Washington National Forest April 2011 Appendix F - Species Diversity Report George Washington National Forest Draft EIS April 2011 Table of Contents Table of Contents ........................................................................................................................... i 1.0 Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 5 2.0 Species Diversity..................................................................................................................... 5 2.1 Ecosystem Context for Species ............................................................................................ 5 2.2 Identification and Screening of Species ............................................................................... 6 3.0 Threatened and Endangered Species ................................................................................... 7 3.1 Threatened and Endangered Species List ............................................................................ 7 3.2 Threatened and Endangered Species Descriptions and Plan Components .......................... 8 3.2.1 Indiana Bat ........................................................................................................................ 8 3.2.2 Virginia Big-Eared Bat ..................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Wisconsin's Strategy for Wildlife Species of Greatest Conservation Need
    Prepared by Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources with Assistance from Conservation Partners Natural Resources Board Approved August 2005 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Acceptance September 2005 Wisconsin’s Strategy for Wildlife Species of Greatest Conservation Need Governor Jim Doyle Natural Resources Board Gerald M. O’Brien, Chair Howard D. Poulson, Vice-Chair Jonathan P Ela, Secretary Herbert F. Behnke Christine L. Thomas John W. Welter Stephen D. Willet Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources Scott Hassett, Secretary Laurie Osterndorf, Division Administrator, Land Paul DeLong, Division Administrator, Forestry Todd Ambs, Division Administrator, Water Amy Smith, Division Administrator, Enforcement and Science Recommended Citation: Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. 2005. Wisconsin's Strategy for Wildlife Species of Greatest Conservation Need. Madison, WI. “When one tugs at a single thing in nature, he finds it attached to the rest of the world.” – John Muir The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources provides equal opportunity in its employment, programs, services, and functions under an Affirmative Action Plan. If you have any questions, please write to Equal Opportunity Office, Department of Interior, Washington D.C. 20240. This publication can be made available in alternative formats (large print, Braille, audio-tape, etc.) upon request. Please contact the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Endangered Resources, PO Box 7921, Madison, WI 53707 or call (608) 266-7012 for copies of this report. Pub-ER-641 2005
    [Show full text]
  • Phylogenetic Relationships and Larval Morphology of the Recently Described Diving Beetle Genus Laccomimus (Coleoptera: Dytiscidae: Laccophilinae)
    Eur. J. Entomol. 112(4): 831–843, 2015 doi: 10.14411/eje.2015.085 ISSN 1210-5759 (print), 1802-8829 (online) Phylogenetic relationships and larval morphology of the recently described diving beetle genus Laccomimus (Coleoptera: Dytiscidae: Laccophilinae) MARIANO C. MICHAT 1 and MARIO TOLEDO 2 1 IBBEA, CONICET-UBA, Laboratory of Entomology, DBBE-FCEN, University of Buenos Aires, Argentina; e-mail: [email protected] 2 Museo di Storia Naturale, Università di Parma, via Farini 90, 43100 Parma, Italy; e-mail: [email protected] Key words. Coleoptera, Dytiscidae, Laccophilini, Laccomimus, larva, morphometry, chaetotaxy, ground plan, phylogeny Abstract. The larvae of the diving beetle genus Laccomimus Toledo & Michat, 2015 (Laccophilinae) are studied for the first time, based on detailed descriptions and illustrations of all instars of L. distinctus Toledo & Michat, 2015, with particular emphasis on mor- phometry and chaetotaxy. The phylogenetic relationships of this genus within the tribe Laccophilini are analyzed cladistically. Lac- comimus is recovered as part of a clade that includes the genera Australphilus Watts, 1978, Neptosternus Sharp, 1882 and Laccophilus Leach, 1815 and is characterized by the presence of natatory setae on the tibia and tarsus, and within this clade it is a sister to the other genera. Third-instar larvae of Laccomimus and Africophilus Guignot, 1948 share the mediodistal insertion of the seta CO7 on the meso- and metacoxa, a short and spine-like seta TI6 on the metatibia, a ventrally sclerotized abdominal segment V and a short urogom- phus. These characters are considered plesiomorphic and indicate a basal position of both genera within the Laccophilini.
    [Show full text]