DOCSLIB.ORG

Mitchell's Satyr Butterfly, Neonympha Mitchellii Mitchellii French, in Southwestern Michigan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Mitchell's Satyr Butterfly, Neonympha Mitchellii Mitchellii French, in Southwestern Michigan Mitchell’s Satyr Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement This Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement, effective and binding on the date of last signature below, is between U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s East Lansing Field Office Project Leader and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Permittee: Scott Hicks, Project Leader U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service East Lansing Field Office 2651 Coolidge Road, Suite 101 East Lansing, Michigan 48823 (517) 351-2555 The Service designates the following as the Agreement Contact: Laura Ragan, Recovery Coordinator U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, Region 3 5600 American Blvd. West, Suite 990 Bloomington, Minnesota 55437-1458 Tracking Number: Summary of Purpose of the SHA: The purpose of this agreement is to outline conservation actions that participating property owners will implement and monitor on their enrolled properties for Mitchell’s satyr (Neonympha mitchellii mitchellii). The goal of the agreement is to encourage property owners to engage in conservation actions for the Mitchell’s satyr that provide a net conservation benefit to recovery. 1.0 Introduction The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) Safe Harbor Program (64 FR 32717) provides regulatory flexibility to non-federal landowners who voluntarily commit to implementing or avoiding specific activities, over a defined timeframe, that are reasonably expected to provide a net conservation benefit to species listed under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). In exchange for this commitment, enrolled landowners (Cooperators) receive assurances from the Service that no additional future regulatory restrictions will be imposed or commitments required for species covered under a Safe Harbor Agreement. Sections 2, 7, and 10 of the Endangered Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended, allow the Service to enter into this Safe Harbor Agreement. Section 2 of the Act states that encouraging interested parties, through Federal financial assistance and a system of incentives, to develop and maintain conservation programs is a key to safeguarding the Nation’s heritage in fish, wildlife, and plants. Section 7 of the Act requires the Service to review programs that we administer and to utilize such programs in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. By entering into this Safe Harbor Agreement, we are utilizing our Recovery Programs to further the conservation of the Nation’s fish and wildlife. Lastly, section 10(a)(1)(A) of the Act authorizes the issuance of permits to “enhance the survival” of a listed species. The purpose of this Mitchell’s Satyr Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement (Agreement) is to encourage non- federal landowners to voluntarily engage in conservation activities to benefit and advance recovery of the endangered Mitchell’s satyr (Neonympha mitchellii mitchellii). The primary conservation activity under this Agreement will be reintroductions of satyrs on properties of willing landowners. Cooperators who enroll in this Agreement may withdraw at any time without penalty, providing they give the Service an opportunity to retrieve any satyrs on their lands. This Agreement is programmatic in nature and applicable in certain counties in Michigan and Indiana as shown in Appendix A. Based on this Agreement and compliance with all other associated regulations and laws, the Service will issue a section 10(a)(1)(A) Enhancement of Survival Permit (Permit) to the Service’s East Lansing Field Office Project Leader (Permittee) for a term of 30 years. Under the Permit, the Permittee may enroll eligible and willing non-federal landowners through Certificates of Inclusion for a minimum term of 10 years under this Agreement. No Federal lands will be enrolled under this permit; therefore, no incidental take coverage or Safe Harbor assurances will be conveyed to the management of Federal lands. The single Permittee approach simplifies the process for private landowners and garners support for non-federal reintroductions. The Certificates of Inclusion will convey all of the Permit’s incidental take authorization and the Safe Harbor assurances to Cooperators. Site-specific Reintroduction Plans will describe the specific conservation and management details of each site within identified Conservation Zones on each enrolled property. Each Reintroduction Plan will be developed by the Permittee and the Cooperator, with technical input from State natural resource agencies and other partners as appropriate. The Permittee will issue a Certificate of Inclusion to each Cooperator after a Reintroduction Plan is approved and signed by the Permittee and the Cooperator. Collectively, the Permittee and the Cooperator are hereafter called the Parties. The programmatic nature of this Agreement provides Cooperators with a streamlined process for obtaining assurances that actions taken to benefit Mitchell’s satyr on their land will not restrict current land use or result in additional regulatory obligations associated with the species under the Act. An attendant Biological Opinion will be developed as a result of an intra-Service section 7 consultation, under the Act, on the effects of the issuance of the Permit and implementation of the Agreement. The Biological Opinion will consider the effects from (1) implementation of habitat management activities on enrolled lands, (2) assurances allowing Cooperators to return enrolled lands to baseline, (3) otherwise lawful activities that may occur on Cooperators’ lands outside the Conservation Zone, and (4) otherwise lawful activities occurring on immediately adjacent, non-participating lands that have suitable habitat for Mitchell’s satyr. The Safe Harbor policy allows the Service to grant incidental take authority to the owners of neighboring lands, where occupation of neighboring lands by the covered species is expected as a result of the Agreement. Neighboring landowners would only be required to agree to such conditions as would be necessary to ensure 2 that the Agreement does not circumvent those obligations or requirements, if any, under section 9 of the Act that were applicable at the time the Agreement was signed. Because this Agreement will be implemented only on lands with a baseline of zero Mitchell’s satyrs, neighboring landowners would have no obligations under section 9 of the Act at the time the Agreement is signed. As such, the Incidental Take Statement in the Biological Opinion associated with the Permit will authorize incidental take of Mitchell’s satyr resulting from otherwise lawful activities on immediately adjacent, non-participating lands that have suitable habitat for Mitchell’s satyr for the length of time that the Permit is in effect. Neighboring landowners who do not participate in the Agreement are not required to implement any actions on their property to benefit Mitchell’s satyr. Normal land use practices on neighboring properties that are otherwise lawful, such as residential and commercial development or agricultural activities, may result in incidental take of Mitchell’s satyrs. The prairie fens that Mitchell’s satyr inhabits are a type of wetland; as such, certain activities, e.g., discharge of fill material, may be regulated under section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Such activities, if conducted without benefit of any required permits, would not be considered an otherwise lawful activity. To address these normal land uses that would otherwise not be restricted due to Mitchell’s satyr, the Incidental Take Statement in the Biological Opinion associated with the Permit will provide authorization of incidental take of Mitchell’s satyr, resulting from otherwise lawful activities, to non-participating landowners (i.e., immediately adjacent landowners) where the presence of Mitchell’s satyr from a reintroduction effort under this Agreement may affect their ownership interests for the length of time that the Permit is in effect. Cooperators who withdraw from the Agreement become non-participating landowners and will also be covered through the Incidental Take Statement in the Biological Opinion for future incidental take of satyrs that may occur as a result of otherwise lawful activities for the duration of the Permit. This Agreement has been developed under section 10 of the Act, the Service’s Safe Harbor Policy (64 FR 32717) and final regulations (64 FR 32706), and revisions to the regulations (69 FR 24084). This Agreement supports the intent of the Parties to follow the procedural and substantive requirements of section 10(a)(1)(A) of the Act. The Safe Harbor Policy was developed to encourage private and other non-federal landowners to voluntarily undertake conservation activities on their properties to enhance, restore, or maintain habitat to benefit federally listed species. 2.0 Covered Species Covered species are those federally listed species that are subject to a Safe Harbor Agreement and accompanying 10(a)(1)(A) Enhancement of Survival Permit, as defined in the Service’s final Safe Harbor Policy (64 FR 32717). This Agreement’s covered species is the Mitchell’s satyr (Neonympha mitchellii mitchellii), which is federally listed as endangered. 3.0 Background The Mitchell’s satyr is a medium-sized, dark brown butterfly. Adult wingspan is approximately 4 cm (1.5–1.75 inches). A distinctive series of sub-marginal, yellow-ringed, black circular eyespots (ocelli) with silvery centers are found on the lower surfaces of both pairs of wings. The eyespots are accented by two orange bands along the posterior wing edges, as well as by two orange bands along the central portion of each wing. Females tend to be larger and lighter in color than males. The satyr has a characteristic slow, bobbing flight pattern and tends to fly through vegetation rather than over the top. They often, but not always, stop after a short flight. In Michigan and Indiana, Mitchell’s satyr is found exclusively in prairie fens, which are geologically unique wetlands, found only in the glaciated Midwest (Spieles et al. 1999), and open parts of rich tamarack swamps. These systems are a mosaic of open, shrubby, and forested communities, with peat soils and alkaline groundwater seeps. Thin-leaved sedges usually dominate the ground layer in the fens (Kost and DeSteven 2000).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Natural History and Conservation Genetics of the Federally Endangered Mitchell’S Satyr Butterfly, Neonympha Mitchellii Mitchellii
    NATURAL HISTORY AND CONSERVATION GENETICS OF THE FEDERALLY ENDANGERED MITCHELL’S SATYR BUTTERFLY, NEONYMPHA MITCHELLII MITCHELLII By Christopher Alan Hamm A DISSRETATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Entomology Ecology, Evolutionary Biology and Behavior – Dual Major 2012 ABSTRACT NATURAL HISTORY AND CONSERVATION GENETICS OF THE FEDERALLY ENDANGERED MITCHELL’S SATYR BUTTERFLY, NEONYMPHA MITCHELLII MITCHELLII By Christopher Alan Hamm The Mitchell’s satyr butterfly, Neonympha mitchellii mitchellii, is a federally endangered species with protected populations found in Michigan, Indiana, and wherever else populations may be discovered. The conservation status of the Mitchell’s satyr began to be called into question when populations of a phenotypically similar butterfly were discovered in the eastern United States. It is unclear if these recently discovered populations are N. m. mitchellii and thus warrant protection. In order to clarify the conservation status of the Mitchell’s satyr I first acquired sample sizes large enough for population genetic analysis I developed a method of non- lethal sampling that has no detectable effect on the survival of the butterfly. I then traveled to all regions in which N. mitchellii is known to be extant and collected genetic samples. Using a variety of population genetic techniques I demonstrated that the federally protected populations in Michigan and Indiana are genetically distinct from the recently discovered populations in the southern US. I also detected the presence of the reproductive endosymbiotic bacterium Wolbachia, and surveyed addition Lepidoptera of conservation concern. This survey revealed that Wolbachia is a real concern for conservation managers and should be addressed in management plans.
    [Show full text]
  • Designation of a Neotype for Mitchellâ•Žs Satyr, Neonympha Mitchellii
    The Great Lakes Entomologist Volume 40 Numbers 3 & 4 - Fall/Winter 2007 Numbers 3 & Article 11 4 - Fall/Winter 2007 October 2007 Designation of a Neotype for Mitchell’s Satyr, Neonympha Mitchellii (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae) Christopher A. Hamm Michigan State University Follow this and additional works at: https://scholar.valpo.edu/tgle Part of the Entomology Commons Recommended Citation Hamm, Christopher A. 2007. "Designation of a Neotype for Mitchell’s Satyr, Neonympha Mitchellii (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae)," The Great Lakes Entomologist, vol 40 (2) Available at: https://scholar.valpo.edu/tgle/vol40/iss2/11 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]. Hamm: Designation of a Neotype for Mitchell’s Satyr, <i>Neonympha Mitch 2007 THE GREAT LAKES ENTOMOLOGIST 201 DESIGNATION OF A NEOTYPE FOR MITCHELL’S SATYR, Neonympha miTchellii (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae) Christopher A. Hamm1 The Mitchell’s satyr, Neonympha mitchellii French 1889 (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae) was described as a new species based on a series of six males and four females collected by J. N. Mitchell from “Wakelee bog” in Cass County, Michigan (French 1889). French did not designate a holotype from this series. Much of French’s collection, and the original material included in the description, are thought to be lost (J. Shuey, M. Nielsen and J. Wilker, pers. comm.). I did not find the syntype series ofNeonympha mitchellii in potential re- positories including the collections of the American Museum of Natural History, Michigan State University, the University of Michigan, and the Field Museum of Natural History.
    [Show full text]
  • Natural Communities of Michigan: Classification and Description
    Natural Communities of Michigan: Classification and Description Prepared by: Michael A. Kost, Dennis A. Albert, Joshua G. Cohen, Bradford S. Slaughter, Rebecca K. Schillo, Christopher R. Weber, and Kim A. Chapman Michigan Natural Features Inventory P.O. Box 13036 Lansing, MI 48901-3036 For: Michigan Department of Natural Resources Wildlife Division and Forest, Mineral and Fire Management Division September 30, 2007 Report Number 2007-21 Version 1.2 Last Updated: July 9, 2010 Suggested Citation: Kost, M.A., D.A. Albert, J.G. Cohen, B.S. Slaughter, R.K. Schillo, C.R. Weber, and K.A. Chapman. 2007. Natural Communities of Michigan: Classification and Description. Michigan Natural Features Inventory, Report Number 2007-21, Lansing, MI. 314 pp. Copyright 2007 Michigan State University Board of Trustees. Michigan State University Extension programs and materials are open to all without regard to race, color, national origin, gender, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, marital status or family status. Cover photos: Top left, Dry Sand Prairie at Indian Lake, Newaygo County (M. Kost); top right, Limestone Bedrock Lakeshore, Summer Island, Delta County (J. Cohen); lower left, Muskeg, Luce County (J. Cohen); and lower right, Mesic Northern Forest as a matrix natural community, Porcupine Mountains Wilderness State Park, Ontonagon County (M. Kost). Acknowledgements We thank the Michigan Department of Natural Resources Wildlife Division and Forest, Mineral, and Fire Management Division for funding this effort to classify and describe the natural communities of Michigan. This work relied heavily on data collected by many present and former Michigan Natural Features Inventory (MNFI) field scientists and collaborators, including members of the Michigan Natural Areas Council.
    [Show full text]
  • Insect Survey of Four Longleaf Pine Preserves
    A SURVEY OF THE MOTHS, BUTTERFLIES, AND GRASSHOPPERS OF FOUR NATURE CONSERVANCY PRESERVES IN SOUTHEASTERN NORTH CAROLINA Stephen P. Hall and Dale F. Schweitzer November 15, 1993 ABSTRACT Moths, butterflies, and grasshoppers were surveyed within four longleaf pine preserves owned by the North Carolina Nature Conservancy during the growing season of 1991 and 1992. Over 7,000 specimens (either collected or seen in the field) were identified, representing 512 different species and 28 families. Forty-one of these we consider to be distinctive of the two fire- maintained communities principally under investigation, the longleaf pine savannas and flatwoods. An additional 14 species we consider distinctive of the pocosins that occur in close association with the savannas and flatwoods. Twenty nine species appear to be rare enough to be included on the list of elements monitored by the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (eight others in this category have been reported from one of these sites, the Green Swamp, but were not observed in this study). Two of the moths collected, Spartiniphaga carterae and Agrotis buchholzi, are currently candidates for federal listing as Threatened or Endangered species. Another species, Hemipachnobia s. subporphyrea, appears to be endemic to North Carolina and should also be considered for federal candidate status. With few exceptions, even the species that seem to be most closely associated with savannas and flatwoods show few direct defenses against fire, the primary force responsible for maintaining these communities. Instead, the majority of these insects probably survive within this region due to their ability to rapidly re-colonize recently burned areas from small, well-dispersed refugia.
    [Show full text]
  • You Can Help (PDF)
    SHAPING THE LAKE HURON TO LAKE ERIE CORRIDOR’S FUTURE: YOU CAN HELP Swimming is a popular activity on beaches various citizen activities, such as It might seem like a lone individual’s efforts throughout the Lake Huron to Lake Erie wildlife monitoring and annual bird Corridor. Every summer, thousands flock counts, that help to gather important to the lakes and rivers around the region for relief from the summer heat. data for scientific research. At the same time, you will learn more about the have activities designed to monitor creatures that live in the region. and improve the health of rivers, could not affect the Lake Huron to Lake lakes and streams. • You can play a role in shaping future development in your community. • Help protect significant natural Development comes under the areas in your community by getting authority of your municipal council N O S involved with a local land N or local planning body, depending Erie Corridor’s environment, compared H conservancy or other conservation on where you live. Generally their JO N E organization. R decisions are guided by master A K • Volunteer for ecological projects in (or official) plans, policies and bylaws that are set through public processes. Students help install soil-bioengineering your area. These can include planting practices to improve coastal marsh habitat on trees, managing invasive plants, You and other citizens can have a say Grosse Ile, Michigan. with the powerful forces of nature and collecting seeds and removing litter in development decision-making by and trash from natural areas and attending public hearings and taking along waterways.
    [Show full text]
  • Integrated Management Guidelines for Four Habitats and Associated
    Integrated Management Guidelines for Four Habitats and Associated State Endangered Plants and Wildlife Species of Greatest Conservation Need in the Skylands and Pinelands Landscape Conservation Zones of the New Jersey State Wildlife Action Plan Prepared by Elizabeth A. Johnson Center for Biodiversity and Conservation American Museum of Natural History Central Park West at 79th Street New York, NY 10024 and Kathleen Strakosch Walz New Jersey Natural Heritage Program New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection State Forestry Services Office of Natural Lands Management 501 East State Street, 4th Floor MC501-04, PO Box 420 Trenton, NJ 08625-0420 For NatureServe 4600 N. Fairfax Drive – 7th Floor Arlington, VA 22203 Project #DDF-0F-001a Doris Duke Charitable Foundation (Plants) June 2013 NatureServe # DDCF-0F-001a Integrated Management Plans for Four Habitats in NJ SWAP Page | 1 Acknowledgments: Many thanks to the following for sharing their expertise to review and discuss portions of this report: Allen Barlow, John Bunnell, Bob Cartica, Dave Jenkins, Sharon Petzinger, Dale Schweitzer, David Snyder, Mick Valent, Sharon Wander, Wade Wander, Andy Windisch, and Brian Zarate. This report should be cited as follows: Johnson, Elizabeth A. and Kathleen Strakosch Walz. 2013. Integrated Management Guidelines for Four Habitats and Associated State Endangered Plants and Wildlife Species of Greatest Conservation Need in the Skylands and Pinelands Landscape Conservation Zones of the New Jersey State Wildlife Action Plan. American Museum of Natural History, Center for Biodiversity and Conservation and New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, Natural Heritage Program, for NatureServe, Arlington, VA. 149p. NatureServe # DDCF-0F-001a Integrated Management Plans for Four Habitats in NJ SWAP Page | 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Project Summary………………………………………………………………………………………..….
    [Show full text]
  • A Distinctive New Species of Cloud Forest Euptychiina (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae: Satyrinae) from Ecuador and Peru
    WILLMOTT ET AL.: New species of Erichthodes TROP. LEPID. RES., 28(1): 39-45, 2018 39 A distinctive new species of cloud forest Euptychiina (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae: Satyrinae) from Ecuador and Peru Keith R. Willmott1, Gerardo Lamas2, James Radford3, Mario A. Marín4, Shinichi Nakahara1, Marianne Espeland5, Lei Xiao1, and Jason P. W. Hall6 1. McGuire Center for Lepidoptera and Biodiversity, Florida Museum of Natural History, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA: [email protected] 2. Museo de Historia Natural, Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos, Lima, Peru. 3. Cambridge, UK. 4. Departamento de Biologia Animal and Museu de Zoologia, Instituto de Biologia, Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Rua Monteiro Lobato, 255 - Cidade Universitária Zeferino Vaz - Barão Geraldo, 13083-862, Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil. 5. Arthropoda Department, Zoological Research Museum Alexander Koenig, Adenauer Allee 160, 53113 Bonn, Germany. 6. Department of Entomology, National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC, USA Date of issue online: 13 July 2018 Zoobank Registered: urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:F4A0F8EB-600F-4973-9D52-DDA7E27C3EF8 Electronic copies (ISSN 2575-9256) in PDF format at: http://journals.fcla.edu/troplep; https://zenodo.org; archived by the Institutional Repository at the University of Florida (IR@UF), http://ufdc.ufl.edu/ufir;DOI : 10.5281/zenodo.1309677 © The author(s). This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons license CC BY-NC 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/ licenses/by-nc/4.0/). Abstract: A new species of Euptychiina, Erichthodes eremita Lamas, Willmott & Radford, n. sp., is described and illustrated. DNA sequence data suggest that the new species is sister to a species currently placed in Erichthodes Forster, 1964, although ongoing revision of the generic taxonomy of the subtribe might result in the reclassification of both of these species in future.
    [Show full text]
  • A New Subspecies of Neonympha Mitchellii (French) (Satyridae) from North Carolina
    Journal of the Lepidopterists' Society 43(2). 1989. 114-119 A NEW SUBSPECIES OF NEONYMPHA MITCHELLII (FRENCH) (SATYRIDAE) FROM NORTH CAROLINA DAVID K. PARSHALL 4424 Rosemary Pkwy .• Columbus, Ohio 43214 AND THOMAS W. KRAL Box 349, Necedah, Wisconsin 54646 ABSTRACT. In 1983, a colony of Neonympha mitchellii was discovered in south central North Carolina. Before 1983, mitchellii was known only from Michigan, Indiana, Ohio, and New Jersey. The newly discovered population co-occurs with Neonympha areolatus 0. B. Smith). Comparison of 60 male genitalia of mitchellii from Michigan and New Jersey and 20 from North Carolina with 60 of areolatus showed that the two have distinct valvae and are separate species. Comparison of 200 Michigan and New Jersey mitchellii with 47 North Carolina mitchellii revealed several population differ­ ences. The North Carolina population is here named N. m. !rancisci. Both nominate and new subspecies are in need of conservation. Additional key words: Neonympha mitchellii !rancisci, systematics, biology, endan­ gered, habitat. Neonympha mitchellii French (1889) is one of the most restricted butterflies in the eastern U.S. Its known range before 1983 was Michigan, Indiana, Ohio, and New Jersey (Opler & Krizek 1984). On 2 June 1983, Kral discovered a small colony of mitchellii on Fort Bragg Military Reservation, Fort Bragg, North Carolina. This discovery was both a new State record and a significant extension of known range. There has been confusion as to whether Neonympha mitchellii and N. areolatus are distinct species (Scott 1986, Mather 1965). Wing mac­ ulation characters are not always reliable. There are several populations in North Carolina where some N.
    [Show full text]
  • Relationships Among Climate, Forests, and Insects in North America: Examples of the Importance of Long-Term and Broad-Scale Perspectives
    161 Relationships among climate, forests, and insects in North America: Examples of the importance of long-term and broad-scale perspectives Talbot Trotter1 Forest structure is strongly influenced by distur- they inhabit. The extensive body of available bance, agents of which can include fire, weather, research on forest insects, particularly economically mammals, annelids, fungi, insects, and increasingly important forest pests, further facilitates the study with the advent of the Anthropocene, climate. of these interactions in the context of anthro- Currently, climate change represents one of the pogenic climate change. broadest threats to natural systems, including forests, with the potential to directly alter forest As work continues to evaluate the interactions structure and function through mechanisms such as between a changing climate and forest insects, it is drought induced tree mortality (Allen et al., 2010), critical that the discussion extends beyond simple changes in tree species distribution (Allen and increases in mean temperature. While the popular Breshears, 1998; Neilson and Marks, 1994), densi- term ‘global warming’ captures the fundamental ty (Allen et al., 2010), and composition (Allen and process of anthropogenic changes in the global cli- Breshears, 1998; Mueller et al., 2005). mate (i.e. a net increase in mean global tempera- ture), it represents a gross generalization of local Although the direct effects of climate on trees often manifestations of climate change, and oversimpli- produce the most readily apparent
    [Show full text]
  • Specimen Records for North American Lepidoptera (Insecta) in the Oregon State Arthropod Collection. Lycaenidae Leach, 1815 and Riodinidae Grote, 1895
    Catalog: Oregon State Arthropod Collection 2019 Vol 3(2) Specimen records for North American Lepidoptera (Insecta) in the Oregon State Arthropod Collection. Lycaenidae Leach, 1815 and Riodinidae Grote, 1895 Jon H. Shepard Paul C. Hammond Christopher J. Marshall Oregon State Arthropod Collection, Department of Integrative Biology, Oregon State University, Corvallis OR 97331 Cite this work, including the attached dataset, as: Shepard, J. S, P. C. Hammond, C. J. Marshall. 2019. Specimen records for North American Lepidoptera (Insecta) in the Oregon State Arthropod Collection. Lycaenidae Leach, 1815 and Riodinidae Grote, 1895. Catalog: Oregon State Arthropod Collection 3(2). (beta version). http://dx.doi.org/10.5399/osu/cat_osac.3.2.4594 Introduction These records were generated using funds from the LepNet project (Seltmann) - a national effort to create digital records for North American Lepidoptera. The dataset published herein contains the label data for all North American specimens of Lycaenidae and Riodinidae residing at the Oregon State Arthropod Collection as of March 2019. A beta version of these data records will be made available on the OSAC server (http://osac.oregonstate.edu/IPT) at the time of this publication. The beta version will be replaced in the near future with an official release (version 1.0), which will be archived as a supplemental file to this paper. Methods Basic digitization protocols and metadata standards can be found in (Shepard et al. 2018). Identifications were confirmed by Jon Shepard and Paul Hammond prior to digitization. Nomenclature follows that of (Pelham 2008). Results The holdings in these two families are extensive. Combined, they make up 25,743 specimens (24,598 Lycanidae and 1145 Riodinidae).
    [Show full text]
  • Executive Summary
    A Guide to the Natural Communities of the Delaware Estuary June 2006 Citation: Westervelt, K., E. Largay, R. Coxe, W. McAvoy, S. Perles, G. Podniesinski, L. Sneddon, and K. Strakosch Walz. 2006. A Guide to the Natural Communities of the Delaware Estuary: Version 1. NatureServe. Arlington, Virginia. PDE Report No. 06-02 Copyright © 2006 NatureServe COVER PHOTOS Top L: Eastern Hemlock - Great Laurel Swamp, photo from Pennsylvania Natural Heritage Top R: Pitch Pine - Oak Forest, photo by Andrew Windisch, photo from New Jersey Natural Heritage Bottom R: Maritime Red Cedar Woodland, photo by Robert Coxe, photo from Delaware Natural Heritage Bottom L: Water Willow Rocky Bar and Shore in Pennsylvania, photo from Pennsylvania Natural Heritage A GUIDE TO THE NATURAL COMMUNITIES OF THE DELAWARE ESTUARY Kellie Westervelt Ery Largay Robert Coxe William McAvoy Stephanie Perles Greg Podniesinski Lesley Sneddon Kathleen Strakosch Walz. Version 1 June 2006 TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE ................................................................................................................................11 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................................. 12 INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................ 13 CLASSIFICATION APPROACH..................................................................................................... 14 International Terrestrial Ecological Systems Classification
    [Show full text]
  • Integrating the Conservation of Plant Species of Concern in the New Jersey State Wildlife Action Plan
    Integrating the Conservation of Plant Species of Concern in the New Jersey State Wildlife Action Plan Prepared by Kathleen Strakosch Walz New Jersey Natural Heritage Program New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection State Forestry Services Office of Natural Lands Management 501 East State Street, 4th Floor MC501-04, PO Box 420 Trenton, NJ 08625-0420 For NatureServe 4600 N. Fairfax Drive – 7th Floor Arlington, VA 22203 Project #DDF-0F-001a Doris Duke Charitable Foundation (Plants) June 2013 NatureServe # DDCF-0F-001a Integration of Plants into NJ SWAP Page | 1 Suggested citation: Walz, Kathleen S. 2013. Integrating the Conservation of Plant Species of Concern in the New Jersey State Wildlife Action Plan. New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, Office of Natural Lands Management, MC501-04, Trenton, NJ 08625 for NatureServe #DDCF-0F-001a, 12p. Cover Photographs: Top Row: Spreading globeflower (Trollius laxus spp. Laxus) in calcareous fen habitat; Appalachian Mountain boltonia ( Boltonia montana) in calcareous sinkhole pond habitat of the Skylands Landscape Regional Landscape (photographs by Kathleen Strakosch Walz) Bottom Row: Bog asphodel (Narthecium americanum) in Pine Barren riverside savanna habitat; Reversed bladderwort (Utricularia resupinata) in coastal plain intermittent pond habitat of the Pinelands Regional Landscape (photographs by Renee Brecht) NatureServe # DDCF-0F-001a Integration of Plants into NJ SWAP Page | 2 PROJECT SUMMARY Overall purpose/intent: New Jersey is the first state projected to reach build-out, and pressure from competing land use interests and associated threats is high on the remaining open space. Therefore it is imperative to strategically protect and manage these natural areas for resiliency, as it is on these lands where the future of conservation lies for plants, animals and their critical habitats.
    [Show full text]